IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2011 / 10TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 7733 of 2011(N) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- JOLLY COSMOS,D/O.COSMOS, AGED 31 YEARS, MULLAKKODE HOUSE, KANDANGALI P.O., PAYYANNUR,KANNUR DISTRICT BY ADVS. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE SRI.M.M.ANTO RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. KERALA STATE BACK WARD CLASSES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD, VANCHIYOOR P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-690 014 2. DISTRICT MANAGER, KERALA STATE BACK WARD CLASSES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD, KANNUR - 670 001. 3. AUTHORIZED OFFICER/SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, TALUK OFFICE, TALIPARAMBA - 670 141. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PAYYANNUR VILLAGE, PAYYANNUR - 670 307. R1 BY ADV. SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN,SC,K.S.B.C.DEVP.CO THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.7733 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of May, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Revenue recovery steps initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 to Ext.P3 notices are under challenge in this writ petition. The amount pertains to arrears in the loan account availed by the petitioner from respondents 1 and 2. It is stated that the marital relationship of the petitioner with her husband remains strained and the husband is not providing any financial support and deserted her. It is stated that the claim of the petitioner for maintenance for herself and her children is pending adjudication before the Family Court. 2. The recovery steps is challenged on the basis that the respondents are charging exorbitant interest and also not allowing settlement of arrears by providing benefits as contemplated under the 'One Time Settlement Scheme'. 3. Learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2, on the basis of instructions, submitted that, the 'OTS scheme' formulated by the State Government was in force only upto 15.2.2011 and the petitioner had not made any approach for settlement of the account, till date. Since the period stands expired the request for OTS settlement could not be W.P.(C).7733/11 -2- entertained. Further, regarding the dispute pertaining to the rate of interest, it is submitted that the rate of interest is demanded in terms of the loan agreement. 4. Considering the rival contentions as stated, I am of the view that interference of this court is not warranted to restrain the recovery steps since no legally tenable ground is raised in order to hold that the petitioner is not liable for payment of the demand. 5. However, learned counsel for the petitioner made an appeal to this court to permit payment of the balance amounts in easy instalments, on the basis of the above narrated factual situations. It is noticed that, pursuant to an interim order issued by this court, the petitioner had already remitted a sum of Rs.15,000/-. Taking note of the factual situation as narrated above, I am of the view that indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to pay off the liability in easy instalments. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further steps for realisation of the balance amounts due under Ext.P1 to P3, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the entire balance along with interest and expenses if any due in 12 (twelve) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 30.6.2011 and on W.P.(C).7733/11 -3- or before the last day of the succeeding months. 7. It is made clear that the above directions will not stand in the way of the petitioner seeking One Time Settlement of the arrears if the Government introduced any further scheme in that regard. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb