IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH MARCH 2008 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 7046 of 2008(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ RAJU GEORGE, S/O. GEORGE, PICHAPPILLIL HOUSE, KOLAPPURAM, PAINGOTTOOR, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD P.B.NO.4, KAKKANAD P.O., KOCHI-30, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT. 2. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD MUVATTUPUZHA TOWN BRANCH, MUVATTUPUZHA, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 3. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & 2 BY SC SHRI. P.V.SURENDRANATH R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------------ W.P.C. No 7046 of 2008 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th March 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner borrowed certain amount from the first respondent. He had moved this court by filing O.P. No 1508 of 2000 and later W.P.C. No 21674 of 2003 after an arbitration award against him has become final way back on 22.04.1997. This writ petition is filed alleging that the Bank is not acting on Ext.P10 representation in spite of Ext. P11 direction of the Joint Registrar of Co- operative Societies (General) to extend to the petitioner the benefit of Circular No 75 of 2007. If the Registrar could take the representation dated 19.02.2008 of the petitioner and issue direction to the Bank on 25.02.2008, petitioner can very well move the Joint Registrar for any alleged non compliance with the direction contained in Ext. P12. It is also not discernible from Ext P11 that the said communication was issued by the Joint Registrar after ascertaining the views of the creditor Bank. 2. Learned counsel for the Bank submits as of now on instructions, that in spite of all the failures to comply with the earlier commitments of the petitioner if he settles the amount before the end of the current financial year he would get a reduction of an amount of Rs 4 lakhs. It may also be noticed that this writ WPC 7046/08 2 petition has come up on 28.02.2008 it was clarified that the pendency of the writ petition will not stand in the way of the petitioner availing the benefit of any scheme that is in vogue. In the aforesaid circumstances, still the petitioner can work out his remedies before the Bank and it is unnecessary to issue any direction. This writ petition is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the Bank for such relief as may be available and pay off the outstanding in terms of the offer made by the Bank as stated herein above. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN Judge 28/03/2008 en [true copy] WPC 7046/08 2