IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30909 of 2009(G) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ BINDU SASIKUMAR, AGED 37 YEARS, CHERIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKE KODALY DESOM, VELLIKULANGARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, P.O.PADY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.A.M.BABU RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY (MUKUNDAPURAM), IRINJALAKUDA. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, VELLIKULANGARA VILLAGE, VELLIKULANGARA P.O. 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK, MATTATHUR, P.O.PADY, THRISSUR. 5. SASIKUMAR, 46 YEARS, S/O.PAPPU, CHERIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKE KODALY DESOM, VELLIKULANGARA VILLAGE, P.O.PADY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.BEJOY CHANDRAN R4 BY ADV. MR.R.S.KALKURA, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.30909 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Petitioner, who belongs to Scheduled Caste community, had availed a loan from the 4th respondent Bank to the tune of Rs.35,000/- for starting a tea stall under the KSRU scheme. Repayment period of the loan was 60 months and the petitioner was liable to repay the entire amount in equal monthly installments of Rs.800/- eacb. According to the petitioner, her husband met with an accident during 2004 and he became incapacitated from doing any work. Consequently regular repayments in the loan account could not be effected. At the instance of the 4th respondent steps for realisation of the amount was initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act, and Ext.P3 and P4 notices were issued. Eventhough the petitioner approached the Bank with request to consider settlement by waiver of interest, the same was not considered. In the meanwhile the petitioner had effected payment of some amounts as evidenced by Ext.P6. But now coercive steps are threatened against the petitioner, and hence the writ petition. 2. Heard counsel for the petitioner and standing counsel W.P.(C).30909/09-G 2 for the 4th respondent Bank. Learned standing counsel submitted that the petitioner can approach the 4th respondent with a proper representation to consider waiver of interest and penal interest, under the One Time Settlement Scheme or under compromise settlement, and if such approach is made, the same will be considered by the Bank. 3. Having regard to the above submission I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the Bank with a proper representation to consider One Time Settlement/compromise settlement. If any such approach is made, the Bank shall take into consideration entire facts and circumstances and shall permit waiver of amounts to the possible extent. It is also directed that the Bank shall consider providing easy installment facility for paying off the net balance amount fixed under such settlement. 4. If the petitioner approaches the Bank with proper representation within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment, a decision thereof shall be taken by the Bank within two weeks thereafter. 5. In order to facilitate the petitioner to approach the Bank with a representation as directed above, coercive steps initiated under revenue recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext.P3 W.P.(C).30909/09-G 3 and P4 notices are directed to be kept in abeyance for a period of 2 months, on condition of the petitioner remitting an amount of Rs.5,000/- within one month from today. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb