IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 29TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4466 of 2010(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.J.AUGUSTINE, S/O.JOSEPH, ATTIPETTIL, NEDUMKANDAM.P.O. BY ADV. SRI.M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, VELLAYAMBALAM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. BRANCH MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, KATTAPPANA. 3. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, KATTAPPANA. ADV. SRI.M.M.SAYED MUHAMMED, SC, KFC FOR R1,2 GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.4466 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 18th February, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenging the steps taken by the respondents for realisation of the due amount from the petitioner, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P (C) No.8808 of 2009, mainly seeking for the benefit of 'one time settlement' among some other prayers. The matter was considered in detail and after taking note of the submissions made from the part of the respondents that the petitioner was not entitled to get the benefit of one time settlement, but that he will be eligible for some other concessions, it was recorded and the matter was disposed of directing the respondents to communicate the matter to the petitioner and to keep all the recovery proceedings in abeyance till such time. 2. The petitioner is now before this Court, stating that the 2nd respondent has issued Ext.P10 notice demanding huge amount of nearly Rs.16,18,604/- without any regard to the actual facts and figures. It is the case of the petitioner that substantial payments have been W.P (C) No.4466 of 2010 2 effected to the tune of Rs.10,25,000/-, as borne by Exts.P11 to P14, which however have not been given due credit and as such, the steps taken by the respondents to realise the amount as presently shown in Ext.P16, followed by Ext.P17 notice issued under the Revenue Recovery Act , are not correct or sustainable, which requires immediate interference by this Court. 3. There is also another prayer in the writ petition to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to settle the loan accounts under the One Time Settlement Scheme after appropriating the amounts paid by the petitioner as per Exts.P11 to P14 on the dates of respective payments. 4. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the respondents have already filed a statement (which however is yet to be form part of the records). With reference to the contents of the said statement and also based on the available materials on record, the learned counsel submits that all the payments effected by the petitioner have been given credit to and that the idea and understanding of the petitioner as to the W.P (C) No.4466 of 2010 3 non-remittance of the amount is thoroughly wrong and misconceived. 5. It is brought to the notice of this Court that Ext.P10 communication is dated 30.3.2009; whereas the payment stated as effected by the petitioner as per Ext.P14 is very much subsequent to Ext.P10. It is stated that after giving due credit to such remittance, the balance payable by the petitioner is stated as Rs.8, 32,247/- as on 1.2.2010. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner disputes the correctness of the figures, stating that the amount remitted by the petitioner has not been credited 'on the date of remittance' which in turn has adversely affected the rights and interests of the petitioner. The learned standing counsel for the respondents assures that the actual position will be looked into and appropriate corrections, if any, will be made, if necessary. 7. In the above facts and circumstances, the respondents are directed to furnish a proper statement of accounts to the petitioner within one week and on receipt of the same, the outstanding liability shall be cleared by the W.P (C) No.4466 of 2010 4 petitioner on or before 31.03.2010. It is made clear that since there is no dispute with regard to the extent of Rs.5,59,104/- as stated in Ext.P15, the said amount shall be satisfied by the petitioner within two weeks. Subject to the above, all further coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P17 shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ma W.P (C) No.4466 of 2010 5 W.P (C) No.4466 of 2010 6