IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 30357 of 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- 1. A.X.KURIAKOSE, AGED 62, S/O.A.K.XAVIER, ARAKKATHAZHATHU HOUSE, UDAYAMPEROOR, MANAKUNNAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT ARAKKATHAZHATHU HOUSE, JOY VILLA, EAST CHURCH, ANGAMALI, PIN-683 572. 2. ELSY KURIAKOSE, W/O.A.X.KURIAKOSE, AGED 55, ARAKKATHAZHATHU HOUSE, UDAYAMPEROOR, MANAKUNNAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT ARAKKATHAZHATHU HOUSE, JOY VILLA, EAST CHURCH, ANGAMALY, PIN-683 572. BY ADVS. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.ABHILASH K.N. SRI.LEELA.R. RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. KERALA STAT FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, THRISSUR-680 004. 2. THE MANAGER, KSFE, ALUVA-683 101. 3. SPECIAL DEPUTYTAHSILDAR (R.R) KSFE LTD., I.S.PRESS BUILDING, ERNAKULAM-682 018. R1 TO R3 ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC, KSFE, LTD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.30357 of 2010-T ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of November, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are challenging revenue recovery steps initiated against them for realising amounts due to respondents 1 and 2 under different chitty transactions. The total amount sought to be recovered through the revenue recovery steps is around ` 26,00,000/-. 2. Eventhough the petitioners have not raised any legally tenable contentions against the recovery steps, this Court had shown indulgence in granting interim stay of all further steps, subject to condition of the petitioners remitting a sum of `5,00,000/- within two weeks from 7.10.2010. Subsequently, the petitioners filed I.A.No.15043 of 2010 seeking extension of time on the premise that the petitioners had already remitted `2,00,000/-. Time for payment of the balance amount was extended till 12.11.2010. 3. Today when the matter was taken up for consideration, it is noticed that the petitioners have filed yet another application (I.A.No.15916 of 2010) seeking further time W.P(C) No.30357 of 2010-T 2 for deposit of the balance amount. The prayer was strongly opposed by respondents 1 and 2. 4. Having considered the fact that the petitioners are subscribers with respect to various chitties conducted by respondents 1 and 2, and that they have defaulted huge amounts without taking any earnest efforts to pay off the liability, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition any more. However, it is noticed that there is no coercive steps for sale of the property attached. Therefore, it is made clear that inspite of dismissal of this writ petition, the petitioners can approach the respondents seeking settlement of balance payment. 5. Needless to say that the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- paid during pendency of this writ petition shall be given proper credit. 6. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners to pursue remedies before the respondents for proper settlement of the liability. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab