IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2009 / 11TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 16595 of 2009(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- T.G. SUNILKUMAR, S/O. LATE NJANASEELAN, THUMPUNKAL HOUSE, VAKATHANAM VILLAGE AND POST, KOTTAYAM TALUK. BY ADV. MR.P.KURUVILLA JACOB RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, KERALA STATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE LIMITED, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, KERALA STATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE LIMITED AT THRISSUR REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY SECTION, CHANGANACHERRY. 4. T.G. SURESH, S/O. LATE NJANASEELAN, THUMPUNKAL HOUSE, VAKATHANAM VILLAGE AND POST KOTTAYAM TALUK. 5. R. SREEDEVI, KOLAKKULAM HOUSE, KADUVAKKULAM COLONY, KOLLADU POST, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 6. BIJU SUKUMARAN, KOLAKKULAM HOUSE, KADUVAKKULAM COLONY, KOLLADU POST, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. W.P.(C) NO.16595/2009 7. M.R. KRISHNANKUTTY, NADUKKAYIL HOUSE, PONGANTHANAM POST, CHANGANACHERRY TALUK. 8. T.J. SANTHAMMA, W/O. KRISHNANKUTTY, NADUKKAYIL HOUSE, PONGANTHANAM POST, CHANGANACHERRY TALUK. 9. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VAKATHANAM VILLAGE, VAKATHANAM POST, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAND DAS, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.16595/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE IST RESPONDENT'S LETTER DT. 12.1.09 COMMUNICATED TO 4TH RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 20.11.07 IN WPC. NO.9507/04 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P3:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 29.8.08 OF 9TH RESPONDENT COMMUNICATED TO 4TH RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S LETTER DT. 29.9.08 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE TAHSILDAR CHANGANACHERRY. P5:- COPY OF THE AUCTION NOTICE DT. 29.9.08 PUBLISHED BY 3RD RESPONDENT. P6:- COPY OF THE AUCTION NOTICE DT. 24.1.09 PUBLISHED FROM THE OFFICE OF 3RD RESPONDENT. P7:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 12.3.09 IN RP. NO.1378/08 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P8:- COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S LETTER DT. 24.3.09 FORWARDED TO RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 BY SPEED POST. P9:- COPY OF THE IST RESPONDENT'S LETTER DT. 30.5.09 COMMUNICATED TO PETITIONER ON THE SAME DAY. P10:- COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S LETER DT. 2.6.09 FORWARDED TO RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 BY SPEED POST. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R1(a):- COPY OF THE LOAN LEDGER. R1(b):- COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. 22.6.09 ALONG WITH COPY OOF THE D.D. FOR RS.10,000/-. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE TSS P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 16595 OF 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner had approached this Court earlier, challenging the coercive steps taken by the respondents, which led to Ext.P2 judgment, whereby it was specifically held that the interference was being made by this Court to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to settle the liability without any penal or compounding interest, but on payment of simple interest at contract rate, along with the loan amount. It was accordingly that Ext.P2 judgment was passed directing the petitioners to clear the entire liability on or before the 30th of May, 2008. 2. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a Review Petition as RP 1378/2008. After considering the matter, this Court held that there was absolutely no case for the petitioner to invoke the power of review. However, with regard to the claim for waiving full or partial interest, it was held that the same could be considered by the respondents only after payment of the balance amount excluding the interest and if the balance loan amount was so paid, the recovery would be kept in abeyance till a decision was taken by the first respondent on the claim for waiver. WPC NO.16595/2009 2 3. Pursuant to the above order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P8 representation before the concerned respondent, which was replied by Ext.P9 dated 30.05.2009 making it clear that the petitioner was liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,74,561/- as on 12.06.2009 towards the principal amount. It was also conveyed as per the very same letter that, the decision regarding the waiver/concession on interest will be intimated to the petitioner in the due course. It is at this point that, the petitioner chose to approach this Court again, by filing WP(C) No.16595/2009. When the matter came for admission before this Court on 16.06.2009, it was submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that, the principal portion will come only Rs.73,598/- and that the petitioner was ready and willing to repay the same. It was in the said circumstance, that an interim order was passed on said date, directing the petitioner to deposit the amount within one week; simultaneously directing the respondents to file counter affidavit, if any. 4. The respondents have filed detailed counter affidavit, referring to the sequence of events and also producing a statement of accounts as borne by Ext.R1(a); wherein the total outstanding liability of the petitioner is stated as more than Rs.3.30 lakhs. It is further pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondents that, despite the outstanding liability as above, the present demand was being confined only to the principal portion i.e., Rs.1,74,561/- as conveyed by Ext.P9, making clear that the question of waiver/concession on interest would be considered in the due course and that the course being pursued by the respondents was perfectly within the four walls of the law and in confirmity with WPC NO.16595/2009 3 the verdicts already passed by this Court as borne by Ext.P2 and P7. 5. The petitioner has now come forward stating that, in respect of the admitted liability as let known to this Court on 16.06.2009 and in respect of the direction to remit the same, the petitioner could remit only a sum of Rs.10,000/- and that he has filed I.A.7766/2009 praying for two more weeks' time for satisfying the condition imposed by this Court while granting the interim order on 16.06.2009. Taking note of the sequence of events, this Court finds that, there is absolutely no merits or bonafides on the part of the petitioner, who can only curse himself for having spoiled the opportunity on interception of the coercive steps by this Court vide Ext.P2 judgment, P7 order and also vide the interim order passed by this Court on 16.06.2009. The Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc