IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2009 / 29TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 13570 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- LEENA S.BABU,SASI BHAVAN, PALAKKAVILAKOM, VAKKOM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,NOW RESIDING AT CHITHIRA, VAKKOM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR,SC,KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Shg/ V.GIRI, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = W.P.(C). No. 13570 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of August 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner was sanctioned a term loan of Rs. 10 lakhs by the first respondent Corporation on 10.02.1998. A further working capital loan of Rs.2.67 lakhs was also sanctioned on 14.09.1999. The actual disbursal of the term loan was Rs. 8.79 lakhs. 2. Petitioner did not repay the amount as per schedule. The industrial unit set up by the petitioner was closed. Petitioner approached the District Industries Centre for registering the unit under the Sick Unit Revival Programme (SURP). Representatives of the respondents also participated in the deliberations on the proposal to revive the petitioner’s unit. An earlier decision taken for rescheduling the loan was not adhered to by the petitioner. The petitioner’s unit was taken over on 18.06.2007. It was then released to the petitioner on 21.07.2007. A further meeting was held on 26.12.2007 wherein the Additional Director of Industries and Commerce presided. Petitioner was to submit a revival study report. The respondents were urged to consider the proposal and also consider releasing W.P.(C). No. 13570 OF 2009 2 further working capital assistance subject to conditions. A revival report was furnished by the petitioner much later. 3. In the meanwhile, petitioner approached the respondent for closing the account under the One Time Settlement Scheme. Respondent agreed to consider the petitioner’s case under O.T.S., if he was ready to remit Rs.3.78 lakhs as O.T.S. advance. Amount has not so far been remitted by the petitioner. Recovery proceedings have been initiated as evidenced by Ext.P7 and P8. Hence this writ petition. 4. A statement has been filed by the respondents. I heard Counsel on either sides. Para 7 of the statement reads as follows:- “ 7. It is submitted that the balance outstanding in the loan account of petitioner's industrial unit is as on 01.10.2008 is as follows:- Principal Amount : Rs. 11,46,000.00 Interest and other charges upto 01.10.2008 : Rs. 28,95,715.00 --------------------------- Total : Rs. 40,41,715.00 ” =========== 5. Mr. S.Sreekumar, Standing Counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent is still willing to consider the W.P.(C). No. 13570 OF 2009 3 petitioner’s case under the One Time Settlement Scheme, if he remits a reasonable amount as advance. Counsel for the respondent Mr. B.Krishna Mani agrees to this. 6. Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner pays an amount of Rs. 6 lakhs in lump or in 2 instalments, by 15.10.2009, then the respondent shall consider closure of the petitioner’s loan account under the One Time Settlement Scheme. Necessary intimation as to the amount payable by the petitioner under the O.T.S. shall be intimated on or before 31.10.2009. Petitioner shall pay the amount as intimated by the respondents. 7. Further coercive proceedings against the petitioner by way of enforcement of Exts. P7 and P8 shall be kept in abeyance till the process as mentioned above is completed. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI) JUDGE kkms/