IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2009 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 24809 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MYTHEEN KUNJU,AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN KUNJU,"KAVANAL PADEETTATHIL, PAYYIKUZHI,OACHIRA.PO,KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.HARISH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER,SBT CLAPPANA,OACHIRA.PO, KOLLAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR,TALUK OFFICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 3. THE SECRETARY,KERALA VYAPARI VYVASAYI EKPLANA SAMITHI,EDAYANAMBALAM UNIT,CLAPPANA, OACHIRA. ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.24809 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Petitioner is aggrieved by coercive steps initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act for realisation of arrears in a Bank loan which was availed by his deceased son. Petitioner's son Sri:Navas M. had availed a loan to the tune of Rs.2 lakhs from the 1st respondent Bank for business purpose of conducting a Book Stall, on hypothecating the stock in trade, including books and furniture. The son died on 17.5.2008 on account of injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. Petitioner submits that he is a chronic heart patient and is not in a financial position to pay off the liability. According to the petitioner a claim petition filed with respect to the motor accident is pending disposal before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alapuzha and the petitioner is ready and willing to pay off the liability out of the amount of compensation expected to be received. However, on default in payment the Bank had requisitioned for action under the Revenue Recovery Act and Ext.P4 notice is issued demanding an amount of Rs.2,14,764/- with future interest. On receipt of the said notice the petitioner had W.P.(C).24809/09-U 2 approached the Bank with a representation as evidenced by Ext.P5 narrating all the above facts. It is also submitted that the amount under demand is not correct in view of the statement of accounts issued by the Bank. 2. In the statement filed on behalf of the 1st respondent it is mentioned that the loan in question was secured only through hypothecation of the books and furnitures and also through personal guarantee of two other persons namely Mr. Mohammed Mansoor and Gopalakrishnan. It is submitted that the petitioner's son had paid an amount of Rs.27,300/- and an amount of Rs.2,14,764/- is outstanding as on 1.6.2008, along with future interest. It is further contended that the petitioner himself had availed another loan from the Bank for conducting business activities. It is also stated that the 1st respondent Bank had already instituted a suit before civil court for realisation of the amounts due in the loan account. 3. Considering the rival contentions it is evident that there is no property belonging to the deceased borrower which is proceeded against. The person and properties of the petitioner could not be proceeded against pursuant to the steps initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act, for the default of the deceased son. Therefore the petitioner could not have any grievance against the revenue recovery steps being initiated. It W.P.(C).24809/09-U 3 is clear that recovery can be proceeded only against the hypothecated articles as well as against the persons who stood as personal guarantors for securing the loan. 4. Under the above circumstances I am of the opinion that no interference is called for in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb