IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2009 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 36170 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.ABDUL MAJEED, SAJEER MANZIL, ANDOORTHEKKETHIL, AYATHIL.P.O, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR SMT.P.LISSY JOSE. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, BEACH ROAD BRANCH, KOLLAM. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. KERALA VYAPARI VYAVASAYI EKOPANA SAMITHY, AYATHIL UNIT, AYATHIL.P.O, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY ABDUL SALIM. ADV.SRI.SATHISH NINAN, S.C., SBT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/12/2009, ALONG WITH WP(C).36171 OF 2009 & 36172 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).Nos.36170, 36171 and 36172 of 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. In all these cases the petitioners, who are small traders, have availed loan from the 1st respondent Bank, under a special scheme viz. “Traders Special”. The scheme is formulated under sponsorship of “Kerala Vypari Vyavasayi Ekopana Samithy”, the 3rd respondent in all these writ petitions. Under the special scheme the loans were allotted without there being any collateral security of immovable property furnished. It is submitted that the understanding was that, the third respondent has to make collections from the individual traders and to remit repayments in the respective loan accounts. However since repayments were defaulted the Bank initiated recovery steps. Being loans coming in priority sector, on the request of the 1st respondent Bank, steps under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act have now been initiated and all the petitioners were threatened with coercive steps of recovery. 2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent Bank submitted that in almost all the cases the Bank had already instituted civil suits. It is further submitted that the loans were sanctioned more than one year back and inspite of W.P.(C).36170,36171&36172/09 2 issuance of recovery notices none of the petitioners have effected any payments. Therefore the Bank is not favouring in permitting any extended period for settling the arrears. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to clear the arrears, provided the Bank is considering their request for waiver of interest/penal interest as well as expenses added to the loan account, to the possible extent. Learned Standing Counsel for the Bank submitted that eventhough there is no “one time settlement scheme” as such prevailing, the Bank may consider waiver of amounts to the possible extent, but the petitioners have to approach the Bank with such request, on payment of a considerable portion in order to show their bonafides. 4. Having considered the rival contentions and the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the petitioners can be permitted to approach the Bank for one time settlement/compromise settlement. In order to facilitate the petitioners to approach the Bank, coercive steps of recovery has to be kept in abeyance for a reasonable period, on the petitioners remitting a portion of the arrears. 5. Therefore these writ petitions are disposed of directing the petitioners to make applications before the 1st respondent requesting settlement of the account and for waiver W.P.(C).36170,36171&36172/09 3 of interest and expenses, on making payment of 20% of the amount in default, within a period of one month from today. If such representations are received, the respondents shall consider the same and take effective steps for settling the amount after permitting waiver of interest to the possible extent and if necessary after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners concerned. The 1st respondent shall also provide reasonable period for clearing payment of the balance amount so settled, in installments. 6. It is made clear that the directions issued as above or compromise settlement if any arrived shall not in any way prejudice the contentions of the 1st respondent Bank in the civil suits, which are already pending or which is to be filed in any of the cases. 7. The 2nd respondent in all these cases is directed to keep in abeyance all further steps of recovery for a period of two months from today in order to facilitate the petitioners to approach the Bank for settlement as directed above, and for the Bank to take a decision thereof. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb