IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2010 / 8TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 35734 of 2009(J) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ JOSE.T.D, THANIKKAL, CHALISSERY, ERAVU PO, TRICHUR. BY ADV. MR.SHEJI P.ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. TRICHUR DISTRICT MOTOR TRANSPORT OWNERS CO-OP SOCIETY, REP BY ITS SECRETARY MACHINGAL LINE, TRICHUR. 2. SALES OFFICER, TRICHUR DISTRICT MOTOR TRANSPORT OWNERS CO-OP.SOCIETY ARBITRATION AND EXECUTION TRICHUR. R1 BY ADVS. MR.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL), SMT.R.RAJITHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.35734/2009 J APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DTD. 15/10/09 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P2: COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 7/11/09. P3: COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.14498 DTD. 30/11/09. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.35734 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a member of the Thrissur Motor Transport Owners Co-operative Society, the first respondent. The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs.3,50,000/- from the first respondent for operating a private bus. However, the amount has not been repaid and the total amount due at present as per Ext.P1 notice is Rs.5,94,567. The matter was settled in an Adalath and the petitioner was permitted to pay an amount of Rs.5,06,260/-, one-tenth of which was to be paid immediately and the balance amount to be paid in instalments before 31.3.2010. However, though the petitioner made the first payment of Rs.50,000/-, he has not made any further payment thereafter. 2. According to the petitioner, he is in financial difficulties and is not in a position to pay the balance amount before 31.3.2010. Therefore, he prays for instalment facility to pay the amount in 20 monthly instalments. 3. The prayer of the petitioner is opposed by the counsel for the Wpc 35734/09 2 respondents. According to the counsel, the settlement before the Adalath was arrived at after foregoing a large amount of Rs.80,000/-. The permission was granted so as to facilitate the petitioner to pay off the balance amount that was due. Therefore, he submits that if the instalment facility as prayed for is allowed, the petitioner should be directed to pay the entire amount that was outstanding, as per Ext.P1 notice. The petitioner is not amenable to the above course. 4. This court, in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is not in a position to grant permission to the petitioner to pay the amounts due to the respondents in instalments. It is upto the first respondent society to decide whether instalment facility should be given to the petitioner or not. In view of the above, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in this writ petition. The same is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the first respondent for permission to pay the amounts due in instalments. No costs. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk