IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2008 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 5708 of 2008(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- SALLY SHIBU,W/O.SHIBU JOSEPH, VALLIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANIMALA POST VELLAVOOR VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.KURUVILLA JACOB RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE MANAGER, THE KOTTAYAM CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD NO.K-48,KODUNGOOR BRACH,KODUNGOOR POST KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE KOTTAYAM CO-OPERATIVE GRICULTURAL AND DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD NO.K-48,KODUNGOOR BRACH,KODUNGOOR POST KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, KOTTAYAM CO-OPERATIVE GRICULTURAL AND DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD NO.K-48,KODUNGOOR BRACH, KODUNGOOR POST KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. R1 BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER, SMT. ANU SIVARAMN. R2 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/03/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No. 5708 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 18th day of March, 2008. = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = J U D G M E N T After Ext.P5 judgment, all that remained was for the bank to issue notice to the writ petitioner herein, since, even Ext.P5 contained a direction for payment of amounts in instalments. This writ petition is filed by the wife of the petitioner in Ext.P5 stating that he left India after Ext.P5 proceedings and that the bank did not honour the direction contained in Ext.P5. Exts.R2 (a) and R2(b) are placed on record by the 2nd respondent stating that the bank had issued Ext.R2(a) in the address of the husband of the petitioner, though the petitioner takes a stand that Ext. R2 (b) was addressed to the husband of the petitioner knowing fully that he was out of station. The endorsement in Ext.R2(b) that the addressee left India could not have been made by the postman on mere fanciful ideas, without taking the postal article to the residence of the petitioner in Ext.P5. Such endorsement that the addressee is not in India would have been made on the information given from the the residence of the petitioner and her W.P.(C).No. 5708 OF 2008 2 husband. The regularity and propriety of that official act has to be presumed to hold that R2(a) and R2(b) were carried to the residence of the petitioner. Not only that, if the petitioner is aware of Ext.P5, it was open to her to move the bank for any further relief in Ext.P5 rather than stand on the unacceptable assertion that the statement of accounts were not issued. 2. Ext.R2(a), reveals the total outstandings. If the petitioner remits such amounts within a period from one month from now, the proceedings shall be dropped. If the petitioner or her husband has any further objections, it has to be raised before the appropriate forum after making such remittance and not in writ jurisdiction. The writ petition is disposed of as above. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN JUDGE bkn/-