IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2010 / 7TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 22694 of 2010(J) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SUNIL BABY, S/O.NARAYANAN, 35 YEARS, KAIPPANCHARY HOUSE, PALAPPURAM , OTTIPALAM TALUK. BY ADVS. SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI, SRI.R.SREEHARI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. CANARA BANK, OTTAPALAM BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER PIN-679 101. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, OTTAPALAM- 679101 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,OTTAPALAM II VILLAGE, OTTAPALAM-679101. R1 BY SRI. PAULY MATHEW MURICKEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 22694 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioner availed a personal loan of Rs.30,000/- from the respondent bank on 16-1-2006, agreeing to repay the amount by way of 36 equal monthly instalments commencing from 16-2-2006 onwards. In spite of the assurance given by the petitioner, repayment could not be effected on time. In the said circumstances, the respondent bank proceeded with further steps by resorting to the remedy under the Revenue Recovery Act, which is under challenge. 2. Learned standing counsel for respondent bank, on instructions, submits that the loan period is admittedly over and that the only remittance made by the petitioner is to the tune of about Rs.3,000/- and nothing more. The outstanding liability as on 16-7-2010 is stated as Rs.55,468/-. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the prayer of the W.P.(C) No. 22694/2010 2 petitioner to extend the benefit of 'one time settlement scheme' by way of instalments is not liable to be entertained. The learned standing counsel submits that, if at all any such benefit is to be extended to the petitioner, he has to satisfy 25% of the liability immediately and thereafter the maximum period is only by way of 'three' equal monthly instalments. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to clear the entire balance amount by way of reasonable instalments, instead of OTS. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to clear the entire outstanding liability by way of 'eight' equal monthly instalments; the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30th of August, 2010, to be followed similar instalments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. Recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. It is made clear that if any default is committed by the petitioner in clearing the outstanding amount as above, W.P.(C) No. 22694/2010 3 the respondent bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realization of the entire amount in a lump sum. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. mn.