IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON SATURDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2009 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 26063 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR.RADHA MOHAN, KAILAS, EZHUKONE.P.O. KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL) SRI.P.R.MILTON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM, KOLLAM. 2. AUTHORIZED OFFICER, LIC HOUSING FINANCE LTD., 2ND FLOOR, LEELA TOWERS, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 3. THE MANAGER, LIC HOUSING FINANCE LTD., 2ND FLOOR, LEELA TOWERS, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 004. ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA FOR R2-3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) 26063 OF 2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 14.01.2008 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 13 (4) OF THE SARFAESI ACT. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 17.1.08 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH A LAWYER EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF SALES TAX ATTACHMENT NOTICE DATED 1.3.08 ISSUED BY TAHASILDAR, KOTTARAKKARA EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF ONE TIME SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL DATED 24.3.2008 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 26063 of 2008 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, 23rd this the day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT The case of the petitioner is that, he happened to be a defaulter with regard to the loan facility extended to him by the third respondent, not because of any wilful or deliberate attempt; but because of his other liabilities; particularly in view of the loan secured from other sources including from the State Bank of Travancore, Kolloam who had filed O.A 384 of 2004 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam for realising a huge sum of more than Rs.65,00,000/-. It is also stated that, proceedings are being pursued by the revenue authorities as well, for recovery of arrears of Sales Tax stated as due from the petitioner. The proceedings taken by the third respondent invoking the relevant provisions under the SARFAESI Act have been sought to be challenged by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition. However, it is stated that he is ready and willing to clear the liability, if the total liability of more than Rs.38,00,000/- as shown in Ext.P1 is reduced by the third respondent to Rs. 15,00,000/-, giving the petitioner some time as suggested in Ext.P4 representation filed by him before the third respondent. 2. This Court does not find any merit in the contentions raised by the petitioner and he cannot dictate the terms to the 3rd respondent. WP (C) No. 26063 of 2008 : 2 : There is no tenable ground to interfere with Ext.P1. The Writ Petition fails and is dismissed accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd