IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2008 / 9TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 33966 of 2004(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. K.POCKER, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. KUNHABDULLA, RESIDING AT KALAMULLATHIL, P.O.PONMERI PARAMBIL, (VIA) VILIAPPALLY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. K.M.AMMAD HAJI, RESIDING AT KALAMULLATHIL, P.O.PONMERI PARAMBIL, (VIA) VILIAPALLY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.VALSALAN SRI.GHOSH YOHANNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION (HEAD OFFICE), VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY IT'S MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER (FINANCE), KERALA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT MANAGER, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION KOZHIKODE DISTRICT OFFICE PAVAMANI ROAD, CALICUT. ADV. SRI.V.B.UNNIRAJ, SC, KFC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/07/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 26868 OF 2005 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.33966/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 04/07/2002 IN W.A.NO,1410/2000 AND W.A.NO.3151/2001 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P2 : COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 03/09/2001 ON BEHALF OF THE 2ND PETIITONER TO RESPONDENT 1 & 3. P3 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30/09/2002 BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE HONOURABLE FINANCE MINISTER. P4 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07/02/2004 BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE HONOURABLE FINANCE MINISTER. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ---------------------- WP(C) Nos.33966 of 2004 and 26868 of 2005 ------------------------------------ Dated, this the 31st day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T The contention of the petitioners in these connected cases is that they have remitted excess amount towards loan account due to the KFC. However, learned counsel for the KFC submitted that payments were strictly in accordance with the Division Bench judgment in the writ appeal judgment produced as Ext.P3 in WPC No.26868/2005. I do not think there is any scope for this Court to settle loan account between the petitioners and the Corporation. However, in view of the contention raised, there will be direction to the KFC to give the details showing dates on which interest and other charges are debited and adjustments of payments made towards loan account and the balance due and final settlement of liability in the form of statement of account. If there is any excess, then there will be direction to the KFC to refund the same to petitioners without driving them to litigation. However, if there is any controversy, it is for petitioners to approach the Civil Court claiming refund, if any, for the excess payments made, if any, under loan agreement. The writ petition is closed with the above observation. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.) jg