IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2009 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 9714 of 2009(O) ------------------------- EP.17/2008 of SUB COURT, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- M.S.ABDULLA, S/O.MOHAMMED, SATHYADKA HOUSE, BADAJE VILLAGE, P.O.MANJESWAR, KASARAGOD TALUK & DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.K.V.SOHAN, SMT.SREEJA SOHAN.K. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- MANJESHWAR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.C-323, REP.BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER-S.RAMACHANDRA, S/O.MAHALINGA MOOLA, RESIDING AT HOSABETTU VILLAGE P.O.MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.9714 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs: “i) To call for the records connected with the case. ii) To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order quashing Ext.P2 and direct that the award amount can be realised in soft instalments. iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing the respondent to consider the request of the petitioner to reduce the rate of interest and allow to discharge the award amount in instalments under the schemes now available for loans granted by the Co-operative Societies”. 2. Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P.No.17/2008 in A.R.C.No.126/2005 on the file of the Sub court, Kasargode. The execution proceedings thereof related to an award passed in favour of the respondent, a co-operative bank which extended the loan to the judgment debtor on the mortgage security of his property. When the award passed in the arbitration proceedings W.P.(C).No.9714 of 2009 - O 2 was put in execution, the judgment debtor resisted it contending that he is entitled to the benefits of a notification issued by the Government for the agriculturists advancing a case that the loan was availed as an agriculturist. The bank repudiating such contention produced materials to show that the loan was for meeting the expenses of his daughter's marriage. Overruling the objections raised by the judgment debtor, the executing court ordered for proceeding further with the execution of the award. Ext.P2 is that order. Impeaching the correctness of that order, this writ petition is filed. 3. Though notice was served on the respondent, it has not entered appearance. I heard the counsel for the petitioner. 4. Pursuant to direction issued by this court at the time of admitting the writ petition, petitioner/judgment debtor has tendered a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards decree debt, which in the award is shown as Rs.2,40,589/-. 5. Having regard to the submissions made and the facts and circumstances presented, I find that it will not be proper for this Court to pass any order as urged by the petitioner, since a W.P.(C).No.9714 of 2009 - O 3 validly obtained award is put in execution by the decree holder. However, I make it clear that it will be open to the petitioner to move before the bank by filing a representation for reduction of the interest calculated under the award and seek a settlement. If any such representation is filed by the petitioner/judgment debtor before the bank within a period of six weeks, it shall be considered and disposed of on merits within one month thereof. To provide him an opportunity to file a representation before the bank, the court below is directed to keep in abeyance further proceedings of execution for a period of three months. The amount already deposited by the petitioner is allowed to be withdrawn by the 1st respondent, bank. Subject to the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. Communicate a copy of the judgment to the court below forthwith. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-