IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 11849 of 2009(A) ------------------------------ PETITIONERS : --------------- 1. T. GIRIJA KUMARI, E/71, SASTRI NAGAR, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695002, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT P.V.K. GALAXY FLAT, EAST NADA, GURUVAYOOR. 2. SHINY, NARAYANAN VILASOM, (THEERTHAM), ATTINKUZHI, KAZHAKOOTTAM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.MANOJ R. NAIR RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE KEALA FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER, HAIVNG HEAD OFFICE AT THRISSUR. 2. THE MANAGER, KERALA FINANCE, ENTERPRISES, MEDICAL COLLEGE BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, KSFE LTD., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SRI. M.L. SAJEEV, SC, KSFE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.11849 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of April, 2009. JUDGMENT First petitioner is a defaulter to the first respondent. It is stated that recovery proceedings were initiated and at that stage an application was made for settling the liability under the One Time Settlement Scheme. By Ext.P3, the first petitioner was informed that on payment of the amount as indicated therein the liability could be discharged. However, the payment ought to have been made before 31.3.2009. Now the petitioner submits that the 2nd petitioner is willing to purchase the mortgaged property and therefore the petitioners may be allowed to discharge the liability by paying the amount indicated in Ext.P3 and the respondents may be directed to release the document n such payment. I heard the Standing counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 also. Admittedly, by Ext.P3, the Ist WP(c).No.11849/09 /2/ petitioner was informed that on payment of the amount mentioned therein, the liability could be settled. True, the payment ought to have been made before 31.3.2009 and to that extent there is a failure on the part of the petitioners. But however having regard to the fact that the Ist petitioner is now able to discharge the liability, I feel that it is only appropriate that the first respondent allows him to settle the liability paying the amount indicated in Ext.P3 together with interest for the period subsequent to 31.3.2009 till the date of payment. It is stated that once payment is made as above and the liability is totally discharged and the respondents shall release the documents of title deposited by the Ist petitioner. Payment as above shall be made on or before 18th April, 2009. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).No.11849/09 /2/