IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2009 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 9260 of 2009(B) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- A.VISWANAHTHAN ACHARI, PARUSURAMA PURAYIDATHIL, KULASEKHARA PATHI, KUMBAZHA, PATHANATHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.SUNIL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, ARANMULA BRANCH,REP. BY ITS MANAGER. 2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(R.R), K.S.F.E. LTD.,CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM. 3. V.VENU, VENU BHAVAN, VETTIPRAM,PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. V. RENU, DO-DO-DO- 5. V.VINOD, DO-DO-DO R1 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.M.SASINDRAN. R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BEJOY CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 9260 of 2009-B ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 25th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner purchased property from respondents 3 to 5. It appears that 4th respondent had incurred liability towards Ist respondent and the property purchased by the petitioner was mortgaged as collateral security. Recovery steps are taken to recover the amount as evidenced by Ext.P1. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the Ist respondent and also the learned Government Pleader. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, petitioner purchased the property and he is the bonafide purchaser for valid consideration. It is stated that, at the time of purchase of the property there was no subsisting liabilities created on the property. But, petitioner is prepared to pay off the amount. Learned counsel submits that, upon payment of the amount petitioner intends to take steps to recover the amount paid from the previous owners. Learned standing counsel submits that, if the WPC No. 9260/2009 -2- petitioner wants, he can pay off the amount under the One- Time-Settlement Scheme by 31.3.2009. But, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not in a position to pay off the amount before 31.3.2009. Then learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner may be permitted to pay off the amount due in instalments. I think that the request can be granted. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing that Ext.P1 will be kept in abeyance on condition that the petitioner remits the amount with due interest in seven equal monthly instalments. The first instalment shall consist of Rs.30,000/- and it is to be paid before the time of sale mentioned in Ext.P1. As a condition for continuance of stay against Ext.P1 petitioner is to remit the balance amount with due interest in six equal monthly instalments, first of which shall be payable on or before 7.5.2009, and, further instalments are to be paid on or before the 7th day of every succeeding month. If the petitioner does not pay either Rs.30,000/- or any of the instalments as aforesaid, petitioner will lose the benefit of this judgment and it will be open to the WPC No. 9260/2009 -3- respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. If the petitioner pays Rs.30,000/- as aforesaid, the Ist respondent will serve a statement on the petitioner showing the exact amount of instalments to be paid in terms of this judgment within two weeks of the payment. This will not stand in the way of grant of any benefit being conferred on the petitioner by the Ist respondent. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. MS