IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2011 / 10TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 16321 of 2011(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- RAVIKUMAR, S/O.VELU PILLAI, AMPALLOORKIZHAKKATHIL, MEENATHU CHERRY, SAKTHIKULANGARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN SMT.R.S.SREEVIDYA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, PIN: 691 001 2. SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, THE KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE, KOLLAM 691001 R1 - R2 ADV. SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF,SC,KOLLAM DISTRICT CO. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 16321 of 2011(M) APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------ P1:- A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED NIL ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2:- A TRUE PHOTOCPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 4.6.11 //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.16321 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is seeking direction against respondents to command not to proceed with realisation of the amounts due under a loan account, which was availed by him from the 1st respondent Bank. It is evident that, consequent to default committed by the petitioner, the matter was taken up for arbitration and an award was passed under the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act. From Ext.P1 notice it is evident that, an execution application filed for realising the amount awarded, is pending disposal. In the meanwhile, the petitioner submitted a representation to the 1st respondent Bank for OTS and such request was allowed through Ext.P2. The petitioner was directed to make payment of the amounts settled, on or before 4.7.2011. 2. Under the above mentioned circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the recovery steps initiated. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to settle the 2 W.P.(C).No.16321 of 2011 amount in terms of Ext.P2 letter. If the petitioner could not remit the entire amounts as insisted in Ext.P2, before the date stipulated thereunder, it is for him to approach respondent Bank seeking extension of time. However, it is for the respondents to decide whether such extension can be permitted or not. 3. Under such circumstances, the writ petition deserves no merit and the same is accordingly dismissed, reserving liberty to the petitioner as stated above. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, Judge ami/