IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2009 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 11449 of 2007(K) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ 1. SAJAN MATHEW PETER, S/O.O.M.PATHROSE, AGED 47, THADATHIL HOUSE, MYLAPRA TOWN, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. ALEYAMMA MATHEW, PALLICKAL PUTHEN VEEDU, VADASSERIKKARA, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANILAL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU,SC,KERALA FINANCIAL COR FOR R1 & 2 SRI.V.B.UNNIRAJ, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 11449 OF 2007 (K) ===================== Dated this the 30th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are defaulters to the respondents. In this writ petition, the controversy is mainly regarding the adjustment of Rs.5 lakhs paid by the petitioners pursuant to the directions in Ext.P4 judgment, passed by a learned Judge of this Court and Ext.P6 judgment, in WA No.777/06. 2. As at present, all that is relevant is that by Annexure B dated 21/4/2008, the Corporation had offered the benefit of one time settlement scheme to the petitioners, provided the petitioners remit an amount of Rs.22 lakhs before 30/6/2008. As is conceded in the statement filed by the respondents, subsequently the petitioners have remitted Rs.9 lakhs on 29/7/2008 and Rs.8 lakhs on 24/12/2008. Thus, petitioners have paid Rs.17 lakhs and the balance amount remaining to be paid is Rs.5 lakhs. It is towards this liability that the petitioners pray that the payment of Rs.5 lakhs made by them pursuant to Exts.P4 and P6 should be adjusted. 3. The case of the respondents as disclosed in the WPC 11449/07 :2 : statement filed by the counsel is that while quantifying the OTS liability as per Annexure B, the payment of Rs.5 lakhs already made by the petitioners have been given credit and that the said Rs.5 lakhs was therefore never treated as an OTS advance. 4. Thus, the position as reflected in the statement filed by the respondents is that while quantifying the amount payable by the petitioners under the OTS, Rs.5 lakhs paid by the petitioners as above has already been given credit. If that be so, the petitioners cannot again contend that this Rs.5 lakhs should be given credit towards Rs.22 lakhs payable as per Annexure B referred to above. In such a situation, this Court will not be justified in directing the respondents to give adjustment of the amount as prayed for. Thus, as on date, petitioners have to pay Rs.5 lakhs more. 5. In the statement also, Corporation says that they are willing to settle the liability under OTS scheme, if the petitioners remit the balance Rs.5 lakhs with belated interest from 1/7/2008. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the petitioners shall pay the balance amount with belated interest WPC 11449/07 :3 : from 1/7/2008 and if payment is made as above before 15/4/2009, the Corporation shall settle the liability as stated above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp