IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2011 / 30TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 38696 of 2010(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.THILAKAN, S/O.PADMANABHAN, EDAYASTHUCHIRA, CHEMBU VILLAGE, VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR (R.R.) TALUK OFFICE, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 141. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHEMBU VILLAGE OFFICE, CHEMBU, VAIKOM - 686 141. 4. THE KHADI & VILLAGE AINDUSTRIES BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY - 695 001. BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER SRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL SRI.K.P.HARISH - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.38696 of 2010-J ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of January, 2011. J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against coercive steps of recovery initiated on the basis of Ext.P4 notice. The amount was sought to be recovered at the behest of the 4th respondent, being arrears due under a loan transaction which was availed by the petitioner and others, for starting a small scale industrial unit manufacturing aluminium vessels. It is noticed that the petitioner and others had filed a civil suit challenging the liability, which ultimately culminated in a judgment of this Court in R.S.A.No.747 of 2010. While dismissing the second appeal this Court observed that the 4th respondent had issued a proceeding permitting waiver of penal interest on the amount due under the loan transaction and afforded an opportunity to the petitioner and others for payment of a sum of Rs.2,48,821/- under the 'One Time Settlement Scheme'. Ext.P6 is the proceeding issued by the 4th respondent in this W.P(C) No.38696 of 2010-J 2 regard. Through Ext.P6, the petitioner was requested to make payment of the settled amount, on or before 31.12.2010. 2. Considering the facts and circumstances as stated above, this Court was not inclined to interfere with the matter, since no legally tenable ground was seen raised in order to refute the liability in question. However, as a gesture of indulgence, further coercive steps of recovery was stayed, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.1 lakh. It is reported that the stipulation has already been complied with. Limited prayer now raised by counsel for the petitioner is to permit payment of the amount in terms of Ext.P6. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay off the balance amount covered under Ext.P6, within a short time, in a phased manner. 4. Eventhough the writ petition observes no merit on the basis of the contentions raised, I am of the view that indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to pay W.P(C) No.38696 of 2010-J 3 off the balance amount outstanding in instalments along with interest, within a reasonable time. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps of recovery pursuant to Exts.P4 and P8 notices, provided the petitioner remits the entire balance amount outstanding under Ext.P6, along with payment of belated interest if any due, in 3 (three) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 15.2.2011 and on or before 15th day of two succeeding months. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of notices already issued. It is further made clear that the above relief is granted subject to the condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the proceedings. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab //True Copy//