IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2008 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 16983 of 2005(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SRI. BHUVANESWARI AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, HAVING OFFICE AT BHAGAVATHIPALAYAM ROAD, KINATHUKADAVU, POLLACHI TALUK, COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SMT.M.R.VALSA SRI.SREEKANTH.K.R SRIK.A.NOUSHAD SRI.JIBU P THOMAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE TAMIL NADU INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, SPECIAL RECOVERY BRANCH, UNITED SHOPPING COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, 94, DR. NANJAPPA ROAD, COIMBATORE-641 018. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI (SR.) FOR R1 SRI.RONY J.PALLATH FOR R1 SRI.RADHIKA RAJASEKHARAN FOR R1 SHRI.SABU, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.16983/2005 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY R1 DATED 02/03/2005. P2 : COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY R1 DATED 31/03/2005. P3 : COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY R1 DATED 19/05/2005. P4 : COPY OF OBJECTION SUBMITTED BY WRIT PETITIONER TO R1 DATED 23/05/2005. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 16983 of 2005 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 23rd day of May, 2008 J U D G M E N T Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned standing counsel for 1st respondent and learned Government Pleader. 2. The liability is stated to be around rupees two crores. However, 1st respondent agreed for settlement at Rs.50 lakhs in 2005. Though the purchaser of the industry gave cheque, the same was dishonoured. Petitioner's prayer is that collateral security should not be proceeded against for recovery. I do not think the prayer can be granted because collateral security is taken to ensure recovery of the arrears, if recovery is not possible by sale of the industry. However, having regard to the fact that industry never commenced and soon after sanction of the loan, the promoter died, I dispose of the writ petition granting facility to the petitioner to settle liability, by sale of the industry or even by arranging sale of the collateral security, on payment of Rs.50 lakhs initially granted under settlement scheme with 6% interest thereon from the time provided for payment of Rs.50 lakhs under OTS scheme till date of payment, provided payment is made under the above settlement within a period of three months from today. If liability is not settled WP(C) No. 16983/2005 -2- as above, there will be direction to 2nd respondent to proceed for sale of both the collateral security and the industry and settle the liability. It will be open to the petitioner to negotiate for sale of the industry or the collateral security or both and even to enter into agreement for sale, but sale deed will be executed only after settling liability as above. Since 1st respondent is an outside agency, it will be open to the 1st respondent to move this Court for contempt case, if 2nd respondent does not pursue the recovery, after expiry of time granted by this Court. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) jg