IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2008 / 27TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 21624 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ONATTUKARA VILLAGE INDUSTRIAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., NO.KV. IND(A), 251, KRISHNAPURAM.P.O, PIN-690533, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT K.M. IQBAL KHAN, ALMAKAM KE COTTAGE, KRISHNAPURAM.P.O. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.K.JAGADEESH SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE SECRETARY, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PROJECT OFFICER, DISTRICT KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA SRI.K.P.HARISH, SC FOR R1 AND R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 21624 OF 2008 Y ==================== Dated this the 18th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P14. 2. It is seen that the petitioner had defaulted in repaying the dues of the 1st respondent. On an earlier occasion when proceedings were initiated, that was called in question before this court in WP(C) No.4587/2008 resulting in Ext.P12 judgment, wherein the petitioner was permitted to apply for a One Time Settlement Scheme. It was in pursuance to Ext.P12 that the petitioner had made Ext.P13 application. However, in Ext.P13, all that was prayed for was for waiver of interest and penal interest. Petitioner also sought an instalment facility to discharge the liability. 3. Since, the judgment was one requiring the petitioner to apply for OTS scheme, and as Ext.P13 did not contain such a request, Ext.P13 was considered by the respondents and by Ext.P14, they were informed that there is no scheme enabling the waiver of interest and grant of instalment facility. It is challenging Ext.P14, the writ petition has been filed. WPC 21624/08 :2 : 4. Petitioner also has no case that there is any scheme now prevailing, enabling them to claim waiver of interest as they have done in Ext.P13. If that be so, the stand taken by the 1st respondent in Ext.P14 in this behalf cannot be faulted. Then what remains is the request of the petitioner for an instalment facility. Necessarily, while making payment, since waiver is not possible, the entire amount has to be repaid. 5. Having regard to the facts and considering that the petitioner is a society, I direct that the entire amount due from the petitioner, be permitted to be repaid in 6 equal monthly instalments. The first instalment will be paid by the petitioner on or before 30th of July, 2008 and the subsequent instalments will be paid before 30th of every succeeding month. Subject to payment as above, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P11 revenue recovery notice will stand deferred and in case the petitioner commits default in paying any one of the instalments, the respondents will be free to continue the proceedings without further notice to the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp