IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2010 / 11TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18985 of 2010(W) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. THOMAS KOSHY,KALAPPILA HOUSE, EDAMULAKKAL P.O.,ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. GEORGE LUKKOSE, S/O.LUKOSE, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, ST.JOHN'S COLLEGE, ANCHAL, KOLLAM, RESIDING AT SANKARAMPALLIL, ANAPUZHAKKAL, ANCAL P.O.,KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR. B.MOHANLAL MS. P.S.PREETHA MR. C.SINOY RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE K.S.F.E.LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, REGISTERED OFFICE BHADRATHA MUSEUM ROAD,THRISSUR. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(RR)., K.S.F.C.LIMITED,K.S.F.C.BUILDINGS, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER,K.S.F.E.LIMITED, ANCHAL-II BRANCH, MARKET JUNCTION, ANCHAL, KOLLAM. 4. SRI.NOBLE, KALAPPILA VEEDU, EDAMULAKKAL P.O.,ANCHAL,KOLLAM. R1 TO R3 ADV. MR. M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC, KSFE, LTD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 18985 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 2nd day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners, who were the guarantors to a chitty transaction prized in favour of the 4th respondent, are before this Court challenging the steps taken by the third respondent against the petitioners for recovery of the sum stated as due from the 4th respondent. The case of the petitioners is that, in spite of pointing out the actual facts and figures with regard to the assets of the principal debtor i.e 4th respondent, by filing Ext.P3 representation, sent by registered post, absolutely no action has been taken by the third respondent against the 4th respondent, while steps are being pursued against the petitioners, which made the petitioners to approach this Court. 2. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent KSFE submits that, they have already filed a statement before this Court (yet to form part of the records) pointing out that, Ext.P3 representation has not been obtained to the concerned respondent, though the postal receipt dated 13.4.2010 stands affixed on the face page of Ext.P3. The learned standing counsel further submits that, the particulars of the properties stated as owned, possessed and enjoyed by the 4th respondent are not brought to the notice of the respondents by the petitioners and on furnishing the relevant particulars in black and W.P. (C) No. 18985 of 2010 : 2 : white terms, appropriate proceedings will be taken against the 4th respondent, before proceeding with further steps against the petitioners. Submission as above is recorded. 3. Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to file proper representation, pointing out the actual facts and figures, particularly as to the assets/properties owned by the 4th respondent before the 3rd respondent, on which event, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed thereon and the outcome shall be let known to the petitioners before proceeding with further steps against the petitioners. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd