IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 30587 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- R.SUSHAMA KUMARI, W/O.SUGATHAN, AGED 52, CHANDAYIL VEEDU, KALLIKKAD HOUSE, NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANILAL RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HOUSING BOARD JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, HOUSING BOARD JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, HOUSING BOARD JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV.SRI JAYASANKARAN(SC KSHB) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P(C) .NO. 30587 OF 2009 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2009 JUDGMENT The issue pertains to recovery steps initiated for realisation of housing loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent. The loan was sanctioned in the year 1991, to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/-. But the respondents have released payment only an amount of Rs.31,900/-, because there was default on the part of the petitioner in progressing with construction of the residential building. It is revealed that against non-disbursement of the balance amount, the petitioner had approached before the Consumer Redressal Forum and further before the State Commission for Consumer Disputes, but the said petition were dismissed. When recovery steps were initiated for releasing the amount, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 representation seeking remission of interest, expressing willingness to pay the principal amount. Since such request was not considered, the petitioner had approached this Court on an earlier W.P(C) .NO. 30587 OF 2009 2 occasion. In Ext.P4 judgment this Court directed respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's request for remission of interest, if maintainable or otherwise acceptable. The petitioner was directed to remit the principal amount within one month from the date of the judgment. Accordingly the principal amount of Rs.31,900/- was paid on 7.10.09. 2. Grievance of petitioner is at present is that inspite of specific directions contained in Ext.P4 judgment Ext.P8 notice is now issued by the 3rd respondent Accounts Officer, demanding payment of the entire amount of interest, without considering any remission. The petitioner is challenging the coercive steps of recovery now sought to be proceeded against. 3. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the loan in question is in the category of HIG (Higher Income Group) and that as per the scheme of one time settlement prevailing at present, loans in such category cannot be considered for settlement, and therefore waiver of interest is not permissible. It is further contended that the 3rd respondent had issued Ext.P8 only in compliance with the directions contained in Ext. P4 Judgment, and the reason for non-consideration of remission W.P(C) .NO. 30587 OF 2009 3 is indicated therein. Eventhough learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that there is failure on the part of respondents 1 and 2 to adhere to the directions contained in Ext.P4 judgment, I am of the opinion that it is observed in Ext.P8 that no waiver/remission of interest is possible in view of the scheme formulated by the respondents. 4. Being confronted with the above situation counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this court in permitting payment of the balance amount demanded in Ext.P8, within a reasonable time, in instalments. It is noticed that by virtue of an interim order issued by this Court on 28.10.09 the petitioner had already remitted a sum of Rs. 20,000/- on 13.11.09. 5. Under such circumstance, the petitioner is permitted to make payment of the balance amount due under Ext. P8, in four equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 31.1.2010 and on or before the last day of the three succeeding months. It is made clear that the respondents shall keep in abeyance all further steps of recovery if payments are is made as directed above, without any default. It is further made clear that on the event of default in payment of any of the instalments, the respondent W.P(C) .NO. 30587 OF 2009 4 will be free to proceed with further steps of recovery and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE mns