IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2008 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 27261 of 2006(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.J. IVANHOE, (LOAN NO.TS XII 2/ALPY) KALLUMALA P.O., VIA MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR SC & ST LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER (A KERALA GOVT.UNDERTAKING) REGIONAL OFFICE NEAR N.S.S. COLLEGE, PANDALAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN689 501. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE KERALA STATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR SC & ST LTD., HEAD OFFICE, THRISSUR. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SC & ST DEVELOPMENT (E) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE TAHSILDAR (R.R.), MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THAZHAKKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. R1 AND R2 BY SC SRI. M.K. CHANDRAMOHAN DAS R3 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SMITHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 30.10.2000 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EVIDENCING SEIZURE OF THE VEHICLE; NO. KL 04 D 9534 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 3.1.2002 SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 20.11.2002 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED 15.5.2004 TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSDC AND SC/ST ON 21.5.2004 CONFIRMING THE AUCTION SALE OF VEHICLE FOR RS. 49050/- EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.2.2005 UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT DEMANDING A SUM OF RS. 3,80,099/- FROM THE PETITIONER. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.2.2005 UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT DEMANDING A SUM OF RS. 3,80,099/- FROSM THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.1.2006 FILED BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 13.3.2006 SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE GOVT. EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 29.7.2006 SENT BY THE GOVERNMENT TO THE PETITIONER. FIRST RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT. R1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 4.12.2001 EXT.R2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3.1.2002 EXT.R3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 6.11.2000 TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 27261 OF 2006 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Writ Petition is filed challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of balance arrears of loan due from the petitioner to the first respondent. The case of the petitioner is that loan taken was for purchase of a car and even though car was seized by the Corporation in 2000 for default, it was sold only in 2004. The inordinate delay in sale of the car would have led to loss inasmuch as corrosion and other damage to the car would lead to reduction in value. The Corporatoion is accountable for the loss on account of delay in sale of the car. However, counsel for the first respondent submitted that a surety for the loan filed a civil suit and obtained interim orders from the Civil Court against sale of car. It is only after the civil court lifted it's orders in 2004 that the Corporation could sell the car. If the Corporation was prevented from selling the car on account of untenable litigation filed before the civl court, then Corporation cannot be blamed for the loss caused on account of delay in sale of car. If the guarantor is the person 2 who filed the civil suit and delayed the sale of car, then I feel recovery should be continued against him also. In any case, having regard to the fact that petitioner is a member of Backward community and the business was a total fiasco leading to loss and destruction of car, I direct the first respondent to permit settlement by waiving complete penal and default interest and allow the petitioner to settle liability by remittance of balance arrears due after adjusting payments and recoveries, with six per cent interest per annum, provided the balance arrears with such rate of interest are paid by the petitioner before 15.12.2008. However, if payment is not made as above, then recovery should be made against the petitioner and guarantors who filed civil suit with full rate of interest. The concerned Branch Manager will, immediately on production of a copy of this judgment, give a sta;tement of liability to the petitioner for settlement as above. If petitioner is entitled to OTS benefits, it is open to the petitioner to avail it in the place of this relief granted herein. W.P. is disposed of as above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3