IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2010 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10030 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SRI.VIJAYA GILBERT, DEVAMANDIRAM, KAKKARAVILA, PLAMOOTTUKADA P.O. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL SRI.VARGHESE JOHN SMT.B.DHANYA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (REVENUE RECOVERY), NEYYATTINKARA. 2. THE DIRECTOR, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. BIJOY CHANDRAN. R2 BY ADV. MR. K.P. HARISH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 10030 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 25th March , 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner had availed a loan from the second respondent in connection with the business, which however could not be repaid in time, leading to coercive steps under the Revenue Recovery Act. Met with the situation, the petitioner approached this Court earlier by filing W.P.(C) 33360 of 2009 culminating in Ext. P4 verdict, whereby the claim of the petitioner for granting the benefit of OTS was directed to be considered, simultaneously ordering coercive steps to be kept in abeyance for two months. Pursuant to the said verdict, the petitioner approached the second respondent, by filing Ext.P5 supported by Ext. P6, seeking for the benefit of OTS and also to permit the petitioner to clear the liability by way of 10 equal monthly ihstallments. After considering the matter Ext.P7 order was passed by the second respondent on 10.02.2010, whereby the application for OTS was considered and decision was taken in favour of the petitioner, whereby a sum of Rs. 1,12,000/- W.P.(C) No. 10030 OF 2010 2 constituting the margin money was converted as 'grant' and another sum of Rs.1,21,940/- charged by way of penalty interest was deleted, besides causing substantial reduction with regard to 'collection charges' and the balance sum liable to be satisfied under the OTS was fixed as Rs. 6,28,777/-, which was ordered to be paid on or before 31.03.2010, failing which the entire due amount including the penal interest and collection charges was to be recovered by way of revenue recovery. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ex.P7 to the extent it denies the benefit of installments facility, though the benefit under OTS is admitted as extended to him, as borne by Ext.P7. It is made clear in Ext. P7 that the very scheme of OTS contemplates the payment to be effected as specified under the scheme and hence that payment of 'due amount' under OTS is not liable to be effected by way of installments. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, since the stand of the first respondent has been made clear in Ext.P7, the petitioner would opt to satisfy the entire liability by way of reasonable installments. It is also assured W.P.(C) No. 10030 OF 2010 3 that the petitioner will remit a sum of Rs. One lakh within three weeks and the balance by way of regular E.M.Is. 4. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to clear the outstanding liability in a phased manner. The petitioner shall deposit a sum of 'Rs. One lakh' within three weeks and the balance shall be satisfied by way of 'eight' equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 30.04.2010, to be followed by similar insallments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. 5. It is made clear that if any default is committed by the petitioner in effecting the installments as above, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum, from the stage where it stands now. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk