IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 3782 of 2010(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- V.K.BRAHMADAS, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.KARAPPAN, VANNENGOTTU HOUSE, PO.VENKITTAGU, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.C.HARIKUMAR SMT.MOLLY KOSHY RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THRICHUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, PO.BOX-86,, MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR-1. 2. V.SATHY DEVI, AUTHORIZED OFFICER, THRICHUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR-1. BY ADV. C.D. DILEEP, SC, THRISSUR URBAN CO-OP. BANK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 3782 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 23rd February , 2010 J U D G M E N T The proceedings taken by the respondent Bank seeking to realise the entire due amount under a loan transaction were earlier sought to be intercepted by filing W.P.(C) No. 23503 of 2009, which culminated in Ext. P2 judgment, whereby the petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. Two lakhs within six weeks and to clear the balance liability as specified therein by way of five equal monthly installments commencing from 15th November, 2009. The grievance of the petitioner is that Ext.P2 verdict was passed on the basis of the specific submission made from the part of the Bank, stating that the Bank was ready and willing to waive 'Default interest' as well as the 'penal interest', as specifically taken note of in Ext. P2 verdict. Despite such assurance given, Ext. P4 letter was issued by the Bank informing that they have waived the 'penal interest', but nothing was mentioned with regard to 'default interest' 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submits that even though initial deposit of Rs. Two lakhs was W.P.(C) No. 3782 OF 2010 2 made by the petitioner, the remaining liability was not cleared by way of regular installments, as specified in Ext.P2. It is further stated that the idea and understanding of the petitioner as to the offer made from the part of the Bank with regard to waiver of 'penalty interest'/'default interest' is wrong and unfounded, in so far as both the terms constitute the very same instance and that permissible deduction has already been given by waiving penal interest, as clearly stated in Ext.P4. It is further submitted that the attempt of the petitioner is only to protract things. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was never told that the 'penal interest' as well as 'default interest' were only one and the same and that the petitioner is ready and willing to clear the outstanding liability, and the time granted by this Court vide Ext. P2 judgment might be made available to the petitioner in this regard. 4. Taking note of the fact that this Court has already granted five installments vide Ext.P2 and that the time to satisfy the entire loan transaction will expire only by 15.04.2010, this Court, taking a lenient view, permits the W.P.(C) No. 3782 OF 2010 3 petitioner to clear the liability by way of two equal installments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 15.03.2010 and the last one to be effected on or before 15.04.2010. Subject to this, the recovery proceedings stated as being pursued shall be kept in abeyance, making it clear that if any default is committed by the petitioner in effecting the installments as above, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum, from the stage where it stands now. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk