IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 29TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3838 of 2008(F) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.J.SEBASTIAN, AGED 46, S/O. P.V.JOSEPH, PARATHARA HOUSE, PONAIKARA, ELAMAKARA P.O., COCHIN-26. BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, ADV. SRI.NAVEEN SHERRY LUKOSE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., ERNAKULAM MAIN BRANCH, JEW STREET, ERNAKULAM-682 035, REPRESENTED BY SENIOR MANAGER. 3. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R.), KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., I.S.PRESS ROAD, BANERJI ROAD, COCHIN-682 018. 4. INDIRA K., UNION BANK OF INDIA, M.G.ROAD BRANCH, ERNAKULAM. 5. CHANDINI GOPALAKRISHNAN, UNION BANK OF INDIA, PERUMBAVOOR BRANCH. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL, ADV. SRI.M.L.SAJEEVAN, SC, KSFE LTD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 3838 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 18th February, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner subscribed to a chit conducted by the 2nd respondent in the year 1999 for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. The chit consists of 100 instalments each for an amount of Rs.750/-. Apparently, the chit was prized for an amount of Rs.70,000/- and it seems that respondents 4 and 5 and the petitioner entered into an agreement by which an amount of Rs.57,000/- was handed over by the petitioner to respondents 4 and 5. This is evidenced by Exhibit P2. Petitioner submits that respondents 4 and 5 agreed to pay the remaining instalments in favour of the 2nd respondent. According to the petitioner, instalments were remitted for some time but later defaulted. Petitioner now prays that proceedings may be taken against respondents 4 and 5 and not against the petitioner. 2. Going by the averments in the writ petition there does not seem to be a contract between respondents 4 and 5 and 2nd respondent nor is it a case where the petitioner stands W.P ( C) No. 3838 of 2008 2 exonerated from his liability to pay the amount due to the 2nd respondent. The relationship between the 2nd respondent and the petitioner is that of a Foreman and subscriber of a chit. Exhibit P2 evidences a subsequent agreement between the subscriber and two other persons who stood as sureties to the petitioner at the time when the petitioner received the amount from the KSFE. If the petitioner is trying to enforce Exhibit P2 agreement independently, his remedies lie before the Civil Court. Taking note of the fact that according to the petitioner, some of the instalments were actually paid by respondents 4 and 5, voluntarily, in my view, this aspect may be considered by the 2nd respondent in the first instance. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms: i) Second respondent shall issue notice to the petitioner and respondents 4 and 5 showing the précise amount due and thereupon the petitioner and respondents 4 and 5 may appear before the 2nd respondent . Such notice shall be issued within a period of one month from today. ii) When the parties appear before the 2nd respondent, the competent authority may draw up a proceedings indicating W.P ( C) No. 3838 of 2008 3 schedule of repayment and the manner it has to be repaid. This may be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, which shall be immediately placed before the 2nd respondent by the petitioner. The interim order passed on 7.2.2008 shall continue till such orders are passed by the 2nd respondent and thereafter the enforcement of the demand notice shall be subject to the proceedings to be drawn up by the 2nd respondent in this regard. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 3838 of 2008 4 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 ORDER 25th May, 2007