IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2010 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1932 RP.No. 260 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.16723/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS --------------------------------- 1. GAYATHRI PUBLIC SCHOOL,1/374,KUNDUKADU, PUTHUSSERY,PALAKKAD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, V.GOVINDAN NAIR. 2. V.GOVINDAN NAIR,AGED 52,S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, HON.SECRETARY,GAYATHRI PUBLIC SCHOOL AND GAYATHRI CHARITABLE TRUST,RESIDING AT VAIKATH HOUSE,EZHUMANGAD ARANGOTTUKARA,PALAKKAD. BY ADVS. MR. ANIL S.RAJ MS. K.N.RAJANI MS. RADHIKA RAJASEKHARAN P. MS. ANILA PETER MS. BEENA DEVASSY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(RR), PALAKKAD. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PUTHUSSERY, PALAKKAD. 4. ING VYSYA BANK,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,CONSUMER FINANCE DIVISION,RAVIPURAM, ERNAKULAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.K.B.RAMANAND THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- Review Petition No.260 of 2010 in WP(C).No.16723 of 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March, 2010 O R D E R -------------- 1. In fact, through the review petition the petitioner is seeking an extension of the time stipulated for payment as per judgment dt.15.10.2009. The petitioner was directed to pay an amount of Rs.1 lakh on or before 30.11.2009 and balance amount in 4 equal monthly installments starting from 31.12.2009 onwards. It is stated that the petitioner had remitted an amount of Rs.50,000/- on 9.11.2009. In such case, if the petitioner had any difficulty to make payment before the dates stipulated, it was for them to approach this court seeking extension, well within the time. It is noticed that the review petition is filed only on 9.3.2010, i.e: much after the date stipulated for making payment. 2. Learned counsel for the review petitioner seeks indulgence of this court in permitting payment of the balance amount within a reasonable time, on the ground RP.260/10 in WP(C).16723/09 -2- that the 1st petitioner is a public school wherein students are studying and that any coercive steps of recovery taken will affect functioning of the school. Mr.R.S.Kalkura, learned counsel for the 4th respondent Bank stoutly opposed contending that there is deliberate failure on the part of the petitioner in taking advantage of the benevolence shown by this court through judgment dt.15.10.2009. It is also argued that the review petition is filed at a highly belated stage and the entire amount ought to have been cleared payment by the end of April 2010, as stipulated in the Judgment. 3. Having considered the facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the review petition is totally unsustainable. However, considering the fact that coercive steps if any taken will affect functioning of the school, I am inclined to grant one more chance to the petitioner. 4. Accordingly the review petition is allowed and the judgment is modified to the extent of permitting the petitioner to make payment of the entire balance outstanding payment to the respondent in 3 equal monthly installments, falling due on or before 31.3.2010 and on or RP.260/10 in WP(C).16723/09 -3- before the last day of the two succeeding months. Needless to say that the default clause stipulated in the judgment will apply in the case if there is any failure to comply with the said direction. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb