` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2010 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1932 WA.No. 528 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.8333/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS IN THE WRIT PETITION ----------------------- 1. M.A.FATHIMA, AGED 40 YEARS, PROPRIETRIX, M/S.SHIFA BAKE HOUSE, MEDICAL COLLEGE ROAD, ALAPPUZHA. 2. K.Y.RASHEED, AGED 43 YEARS,FAIRS, CIVIL STATION WARD, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN THE WRIT PETITION ------------------------- 1. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, (K.F.C.), KUMARANASAN BUILDINGS, D.C.ROAD, ALAPPUZHA REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT MANAGER. 2. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, RECOVERY SECTION, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, ALAPPUZHA. BY SC FOR KFC ADV. SRI.A.A.ABUL HASSAN. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2010, ALONG WITH W.P.(C) No.8333/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.CHELAMESWAR, C.J. & P.R.RAMAN, J. ------------------------------- W.A.No.528 of 2010 & W.P.(C) No.8333 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T J.Chelameswar, C.J. W.A.No.528 of 2010 arise out of an order, dated 17.3.2010, in W.P.(C) No.8333 of 2010. In view of the agreement reached between the parties, we do not think it necessary to give a detailed facts of the litigation, except to state the minimum required for the disposal purpose. 2. The first appellant borrowed certain amounts from the first respondent herein. The second appellant is one of the guarantors for the said transaction. On the ground that the amounts due on the above mentioned date were not paid as agreed upon, the first respondent Corporation resorted to the provisions of Section 71 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. In exercise of the power under the above mentioned Act, house property of the appellants was attached. Challenging the said proceedings, appellants herein have approached this Court by W.A.No.528/2010 & W.P.(C) No.8333/2010 2 way of W.P.(C) No.8333 of 2010. While admitting the above mentioned writ petition, a learned Single Judge of this Court directed that pending consideration of the writ petition, the property seized from the writ petitioners/appellants herein be handed over to them, on condition that the appellants pay 40% of the amount due and outstanding to be paid to the first respondent herein. 3. Complaining that the condition imposed by the learned Single Judge of payment of 40% of the entire liability is onerous, the present writ appeal is filed. 4. When the matter is taken up, with the consent of the parties, writ petition itself was heard. Parties agreed that both the writ appeal and the writ petition can be disposed of on recording the undertaking of the appellants that the appellants would pay the entire amount of demand, i.e., an amount of Rs.20,76,707/-, due as on 1st of March, 2010, in the following manner:- 5. That the appellants would pay an amount of Rs.2 lakhs on or before 5th of April, 2010 and on receipt of the W.A.No.528/2010 & W.P.(C) No.8333/2010 3 same, the first respondent would re-deliver the possession of the property seized from them. The appellants would pay a further amount of Rs.3 lakhs on or before 30th of April, 2010, and the balance in six monthly equal instalments, the first of which would be due on 30th of May, 2010 and the other on the 30th of every succeeding months. It is also made clear that the appellants shall pay the above mentioned amounts either in cash or by way of Demand Draft. Default in payment of any one of the instalments, as indicated above, would automatically entitle the first respondent to resume possession of the property and proceed with the matter, in accordance with law. Both the writ petition and the writ appeal are accordingly disposed of. J.CHELAMESWAR, Chief Justice P.R.RAMAN, Judge nj.