IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2008 / 25TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 18456 of 2005(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ NALINI, D/O. PAKKEERAN, MOTTANADI, THOOVAL, MAYILATTY P.O., HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUBHASH SYRIAC RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KASARAGOD. 3. THE SALE OFFICER CUM SENIOR INSPECTOR HOSDURG PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., C.390, P.O. KANHANGAD. 4. HOSDURG PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.C.390, KANHANGAD BRANCH REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, KASARAGODE DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVERNMENT POLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN R4 BY ADV. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).18456/2005-V APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 30/03/05 DECLARING ENTIRE KASARAGODE DIST. AS DROUGHT AFFECTED AREA. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE COMMON GUIDELINES FOR PRIORITY SECTOR ADVANCES ISSUED BY THE RBI DATED 11/11/02. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 03/05/05. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPLY SENT BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE Rs/ THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.18456 of 2005-V = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 16th day of July, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner's late father availed a loan from the fourth respondent. Faced with distress action, this writ petition is filed pleading that owing to drought in Kasaragode District, the entire cultivation was lost and the petitioner is entitled to pay off the outstandings and save distress action. While there is no jurisdictional error or legal infirmity in the impugned proceedings, the learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the petitioner had made certain deposits following the interim order dated 20-6-2005, though all the conditions in that order were not scrupulously complied with. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances, it is directed that the recovery WP(C)18456/2005 -: 2 :- against the petitioner will be taken further by extending such ameliorative benefit, if any, that may be available to the sector in which the loan was granted, applying the appropriate circulars and schemes, if any, that may govern the case. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/180708