IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2010 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 1669 of 2010(G) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SIVARAMAKRISHNAN T.P., AGED 69 YEARS, S/O. KANNAN, THALAPPOYIL HOUSE, NARIPPATTA AMSOM, CHEEKKONNU DESOM, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.SREEJITH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, PAVAMANI ROAD, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, PAVAMANI ROAD, KOZHIKODE. R1 BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA, R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MATHEW GEORGE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/04/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.1669/2010-G: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE NOTICE OF SALE DTD. NIL. OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY BY THE R.2. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE PETITIONERS REQUEST LETTER TO THE R.2. DTD. 08/01/2010. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE R.1. GRANTING O.T.S TO THE PETITIONER IN THE YEAR 2008 DTD 17/06/2008. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.1669 of 2010-G ---------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of April, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs.1.10 lakhs from the first respondent in the year 1980, for starting a small scale industry, but the repayment could not be effected on time and the liability got mounted up. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is ready and willing to clear the liability by way of 'One Time Settlement' and that necessary direction may be given to the respondents in this regard. 3. The learned standing counsel for the first respondent submits, with reference to the contents of the statement filed, that the matter was originally sought to be settled by accepting the principal sum of Rs.1 lakh, despite the fact that the total outstanding liability including interest and other incidental charges had already crossed Rs.1.40 lakhs as on that date. It is pointed out that the petitioner, though was extended the benefit of One Time Settlement earlier, it was not utilized by him. This being the position, there is absolutely no merit or bonafides on the part of the petitioner. The learned counsel however submits that, if the W.P(C) No.1669 of 2010-G 2 petitioner is ready to prove his bonafides by depositing a portion of the principal amount and agrees to satisfy the One Time Settlement amount, with belated interest and submits an application for revival of the One Time Settlement, the same can be caused to be considered by the higher authorities, 4. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- within two weeks and submit an application for revival of the One Time Settlement, also expressing the willingness to clear the balance amount to top up the figure of Rs.1,10,000/- and also to satisfy the 'belated interest'; on which event, the said application shall be referred to the authorities concerned and got finalised as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The liability of the petitioner to satisfy the balance amount under the One Time Settlement shall be subject to the orders so to be passed, as aforesaid. Further coercive steps shall be kept in abeyance till such time. The Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE //True Copy// ab P.A to Judge W.P(C) No.1669 of 2010-G 3