IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14065 of 2010(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K. SHARAFEDEEN, KIZHAKKATHIL VEEDU, MYLAKKADU.P.O, KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR. C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KUNDARA. 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, CHATHANNOOR, KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR. P.P. THAJUDEEN, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 14065 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 20th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging the sustainability of the steps taken for recovery of amount of Rs. 45,643/- towards the Electricity Charges, invoking the power under the relevant provisions under Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. 2. The petitioner is running a brick manufacturing unit. Electricity connection was obtained after executing 'minimum guarantee' agreement with the respondents. Subsequently, after running the business for nearly 8 years, the petitioner had to wind up the same, because of some unforeseen circumstances. It is stated that, the respondents have not sustained any loss because of the action pursued by the petitioner, for the fact that quiet a number of connections has been provided by the respondents after executing the minimum guarantee agreement by the petitioner and as such, it is not correct or proper to insist that the petitioner ought to have satisfied the same for a period of 10 years, as contained in the minimum guarantee agreement. 3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the rights and liberties of the respondents in this regard are very much settled by virtue of the terms of the Agreement, relevant W.P. (C) No. 14065 of 2010 : 2 : provisions of law and also by the binding judicial precedents. 4. This Court finds considerable force in the submission made from the part of the respondents. However, taking note of the persuasive submission made by the counsel for the petitioner and also with regard to plight of the family of the petitioner, petitioner is permitted to clear the outstanding liability of Rs. 48,643/- shown in Ext.P2 with subsequent interest if any, by way of 10 equal monthly installments; the first of which shall be paid on or before the 15th June, 2010; to be followed by the similar installments to be effected on or before the 15th of the succeeding months. Subject to this, the coercive proceedings stated as being pursued against petitioner under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. It is made clear that if the petitioner commits any default in effecting the installments, as aforesaid, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realization of the entire amount in lump sum. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd