IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 12TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 21ST KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 32298 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.K.AMMUKUTTIAMMA, KANANGATTUNADUVILE MURIYIL HOUSE, KARUNAPURAM PO., IDUKKI, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.RATNAKARAN SMT.M.R.JAYALATHA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, IDUKKI DIVISION, KATTAPPANA. 2. THE ASST. SECRETARY, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, IDUKKI DIVISION, KATTAPPANA. 3. KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.A.JAYASANKAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL RAHIM, J. ----------------------------- W.P(C) No. 32298 of 2009-F ------------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of November, 2009. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a widow who had availed a housing loan from the respondents by mortgaging her property. According to the petitioner repayment of the loan became defaulted due to continuance illness of her husband, who died subsequently. It is stated that due to threat of distress actions against the immovable property, she became compelled to pay off the entire liability, even before the respondent would consider settlement of the loan account under the one time settlement scheme, which was prevalent. According to the petitioner going by norms prescribed under the scheme which was in force during the relevant time when the amount was remitted, the quantum of payment effected by her is very high. Therefore the petitioner had submitted Exts.P6 and P7 representations before respondents 1 and 3 seeking refund of the excess amount, on allowing settlement of the loan account under the one time settlement scheme. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and standing counsel appearing for the respondents. Learned standing W.P(C) No. 32298 of 2009-F 2 counsel submitted that Exts.P6 and P7 representations will be considered and a decision thereon will be taken, in view of the circumstances prevailing. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider and dispose of Exts.P6 and P7, as early as possible, at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. C.K.ABDUL RAHIM JUDGE ab