IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5990 of 2011(W) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- MOHANAN.K.A, S/O. AZHAKAN.K.A, KALLOLICKAL PUTHENPURAYIDATHIL, NARAKATHANI.P.O, VENNIKULAM, PURAMATTOM VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VARUGHESE M EASO SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE THIRUVALL PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. NO. A 159, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, PIN - 679 645. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689 645. 3. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 5990 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner had availed a loan from the first respondent bank on the security of a parcel of land. When the loan was not repaid, the bank recalled the loan and initiated steps under section 19 of the Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Banks Act to sell the security without the intervention of the court. The sale officer thereupon issued Ext.P2 notice dated 2.2.2011 calling upon the petitioner to clear the arrears and to close the loan account before 15.2.2011 failing which he was cautioned that the security will be brought to sale and sold. Ext.P2 is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that he is entitled to the benefits flowing from Ext.P3 circular issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The writ petition is silent as to whether the petitioner had claimed the benefit of the said circular by submitting an appropriate representation before the first respondent bank. Ext.P3 circular extends to the debtor certain benefits. Therefore it is for the debtor to approach the creditor seeking such WPC No.5990/2011 2 benefit. In the instant case, the relevant averments are those contained in paragraph 5 of the writ petition, which read as follows: “The petitioner has also met the 2nd respondent and requested him to direct the 1st respondent to grant some breathing time as per Circular No.63/2010 issued by the 3rd respondent, so that the petitioner can wipe of the outstanding arrears of the loan amount. It is not known whether the 2nd respondent has done anything tangible. True copy of Circular No.63/2010 is produced & marked as Exhibit P3.” 3. The petitioner has not even pleaded that he had gone over to the first respondent bank and requested either in writing or orally to extend him the benefits flowing from Ext.P3. His contention is that he had met the second respondent and requested him to direct the bank to give him some breathing time as per Ext.P3 circular. He has no case that he had made a request to the second respondent in writing. In such circumstances, re -inference is irresistible that the petitioner has not gone over to the bank or made a request either in writing or orally to extend to him the benefits flowing from Ext.P3. I therefore find no grounds to grant the relief prayed for. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.5990/2011 3 WPC No.5990/2011 4