IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17005 of 2010(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- THULASI BAI, W/O.LATE R.SASIDHARAN PILLAI, KUNNUMPURATH VEEDU, VILLUMALA P.O., KULATHUPUZHA-691 310. BY ADVS. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY, SRI.ARJUN S.RAJ. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIATE, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), KOLLAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, ANCHAL BLOCK HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., ANCHAL P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. THE SALES OFFICER, OFFICE OF ARBITRATOR CUM SPECIAL SALES OFFICER, HOUSEFED, TRIVANDRUM-1. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 17005 OF 2010 A ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th June, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner's husband had applied for a housing loan from the third respondent. Accordingly an amount of Rs.55,000/- was sanctioned as loan for the construction of their house. However, the construction could not be completed by the husband. On 15/7/2006, the petitioner's husband committed suicide. It is the case of the petitioner that the entire claim amount under the life insurance policy of her deceased husband was taken away by the third respondent. Thus the third respondent has received a total amount of Rs.88,786/- towards the loan account. 2. The petitioner has submitted several representations before respondents 3 and 4 for being given the maximum benefits or concessions, considering her poor financial condition. The petitioner has also sought for waiver of the interest that is demanded from her. It is submitted that the condition of the petitioner is very pathetic. In spite of the above, the petitioner complains that no orders have been passed on her representation, till date. It is submitted that Ext.P11 is pending consideration of WPC 17005/2010 2 the second respondent and that no orders have been passed thereon till date. 3. In the above circumstances this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner evidenced herein by Ext.P11 in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 17005/2010 3