IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2009 / 31ST BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 26474 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- VASU @ BHASKARAN, S/O.CHOYI, AGED 52, MOORKKANDATHIL HOUSE, PULIKKAL, P.O.OLAVATTUR, (VIA) KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G SRI.R.SUDHEESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, MALAPPURAM DIVISION, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, ERNAD TALUK, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. ADV.SRI.M.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, S.C. FOR R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.J. VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.26474 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Petitioner is approaching this Court aggrieved by the revenue recovery steps initiated by the 3rd respondent through Ext.P1 notice, for sale of immovable properties. The arrears pertains to Housing loan availed by the petitioner from the 2nd respondent in the year 1997. According to the petitioner the 2nd respondent is having a Scheme for “One Time Settlement” of the default loans and that he is entitled for benefit of the Scheme, wherein he is expecting considerable waiver of interest and penal interest. 2. Heard standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent, who on the basis of instructions submitted that, the benefit under “One Time Settlement Scheme” is not available in the case of the petitioner, because he is falling under the category of “Higher Income Group” (HIG). However it is for the 2nd respondent to consider eligibility of the petitioner for settlement under “One Time Settlement Scheme” or for waiver of any interest or penal interest to any extent possible otherwise. Petitioner is at present aggrieved by the proposed action for sale W.P.(C).26474/09 2 of the immovable property scheduled on 22.10.2009. 3. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case I am inclined to show indulgence for permitting the petitioner to pay off the liability in installment, eventhough interference on merits is very limited. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to make payment of an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on or before 31.10.2009. The respondents are restrained from proceeding further with the steps for recovery till such date. On payment of the said amount the 2nd respondent shall consider the case of the petitioner for settlement and waiver of interest or penal interest to the possible extent either under “One Time Settlement Scheme” or as per the norms and criteria fixed in such cases. The 2nd respondent will thereupon issue to the petitioner a balance statement showing the outstanding, after crediting all payments made till then. The petitioner shall pay off the entire balance as per such statement, in 5 equal monthly installments starting from 30.11.2009 and on or before the last day of every succeeding months. 4. It is made clear that on default in payment of any amount as stipulated above, the respondent will be free to proceed with further steps as provided under law. It is also W.P.(C).26474/09 3 made clear that the benefit granted under this judgment is subject to the condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any further challenge against the proceedings before this Court or before any other forum. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb