IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2009 / 5TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 24717 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. M.M.JOHN,MANGALATHUKAROTTU HOUSE, CHIRAKKADAVU VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM. 2. SABU V.JOSE MUNDAKKAL HOUSE, VAZHOOR, CHANGANACHERRY,KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ELAMKULAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.3576 ,KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY,ELAMKULAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.3576, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, CHIRAKKADAVU S.C.E.GROUP, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G) KANJIRAPPALLY. MR.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.24717 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 27th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The 1st petitioner submits that he is the father-in-law of the 2nd petitioner. 2. It is stated that both of them had availed of separate loans from the 1st respondent Bank. Default was committed in both the loans, and that led to the filing of ARC Nos.2012 & 2014 of 1998 against petitioners 1 & 2 respectively and awards were passed in favour of the Bank. 3. According to the petitioners, the 2nd petitioner, the respondent in ARC No.2014/1998, has already discharged the entire liabilities thereunder. 4. In so far as the liability under the award in ARC No.2012/1998 against the 1st petitioner is concerned, the petitioners submit that the 2nd petitioner has a fixed deposit of Rs.5 lakhs in the 1st respondent Bank, which is stated to have been made by him as early as in 1995. The 2nd petitioner submits that the amount available in his aforesaid fixed deposit, along with the WP(C) No.24717/2009 -2- interest accrued thereon, can be adjusted towards the liability of the 1st petitioner under the award in ARC No.2012/1998. In so far as the balance amount is concerned, it is stated that the 1st petitioner is willing to pay the same. 5. It is stated that when Ext.P2 notice was served, though they made Ext.P3 representation to the Bank with the aforesaid request, no response on that representation was forthcoming, and therefore, this writ petition is filed. 6. Having regard to the submissions made as above, I feel that the request made by the petitioners is a reasonable one. This is all the more so, since the interest of the Bank is only to realise its dues, which the petitioners submit that they are willing to pay in the above manner. In view of the above, I dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:- (1) That irrespective of whether the Fixed Deposit of the 2nd petitioner is matured or not, it will be open to the 1st respondent to appropriate the amount available in the fixed deposit of the 2nd petitioner, together with interest, towards the liability of the 1st petitioner, under the award in ARC No.2012/1998. (2) Such appropriation can be made by the Bank, by the force of WP(C) No.24717/2009 -3- this judgment, and no further documents need be asked for from the petitioners. (3) It is directed that on such appropriation, if the money realised is in excess of the liability that is due from the 1st petitioner, the balance will be refunded to the 2nd petitioner. (4) On the other hand, if the amount available is inadequate, it will be open to the Bank to call upon the 1st petitioner to discharge the same, and if it is not done, it will be open to the Bank to proceed with in accordance with law. (5) It is directed that in the meanwhile, coercive steps initiated by Ext.P2 will be kept in abeyance. (6) In case no amount is available, or that the deposit available is encumbered in any manner, the directions in this judgment will stand recalled. 7. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition, before the 1st respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg