IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2011 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5663 of 2011(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- C.NAVAZ,AGED 34 YEARS,S/O.T.ABDULRAHMAN, NOUFEENA MANZIL,NEAR PRIYA TALKIES, PO MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE MANAGER,STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, MATTANNUR BRANCH,KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. THE TAHSILDAR(RR),THALASSERY. ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN FOR R1 SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 5663 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 18th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner availed of a loan of `90,000/- during the year 1999-2000. The loan was availed of under PMRY scheme for the purposes of running a wood plaining unit under the self employment scheme. Default was committed and according to the petitioner, the dispute between the parties were settled in an adalath for a sum of `90,000/- and he was prepared to remit the same. It is stated that despite payments made, recovery proceedings were initiated and that led the petitioner to file this writ petition. 2. A statement has been filed by the respondent Bank which shows that the petitioner was a chronic defaulter. It is also stated by the Bank that, in an adalath that was held on 12/3/2010, though the liability was settled, petitioner did not comply with the conditions in the settlement, as a result of which, he lost the benefit of the settlement. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner's liability is about `1,90,000/- as at present, and therefore, the Bank submits that, they were justified in initiating WPC No. 5663/11 :2 : revenue recovery proceedings. 3. On facts pleaded by the Bank, it is obvious that it was only on account of the default committed by the petitioner that the Bank has initiated recovery proceedings. Such action of the Bank cannot be said to be illegal for any reason. Therefore, the petitioner cannot resist recovery proceedings evidenced by Ext.P2 recovery proceedings. Be that as it may, petitioner requests that he be permitted to discharge the liability in instalments so that the liability can be discharged and coercive action can be avoided. 4. Having regard to this submission made by the counsel, despite the defaults committed, I am inclined to think that the petitioner can be given an opportunity for making payment in instalments. Accordingly, I direct that, the liability due to the Bank will be permitted to be paid by the petitioner in 10 equal monthly instalments, the first of which will be paid by the petitioner on or before 31/3/2011 and the subsequent instalments will be paid on or before the last working day of every succeeding month. It is made clear that, in case payment is made without default, WPC No. 5663/11 :3 : recovery proceedings will be kept in abeyance and if any instalment is defaulted, the Bank will be free to continue the recovery proceedings. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp