IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 8429 of 2008(C) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. USHA G.PILLAI, KOCHIKKATTIL HOUSE VADATTUPARA P.O., ERNAKULAM. 2. SREE GANAPATHY PILLAI, KOCHIKKATTIL HOUSE, VADATTUPARA P.O., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.S.S.HUSSAIN SRI.P.K.NIJOY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. M/S. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. THE DISTRICT MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION PAZHAMANNIL JESSY TOWERS, COLLEGE ROAD, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645. 4. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR [REVENUE RECOVERY] KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. N. VIJAYAKUMAR, THARAYIL HOUSE KOMANA, AMBALAPUZHA P.O., ALAPUZHA DISTRICT. R1 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. I.V. PRAMOD. R2 & R3 BY S.C. MR. V.B. UNNIRAJ. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 8429 OF 2008 - C = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioners are defaulters to the respondent Corporation. Proceedings were initiated under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act and the sale was also conducted. It is thereafter this writ petition has been filed praying that they be given the benefit of One Time Settlement Scheme. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Corporation, on instruction, submits that there are two items of properties in this case. One is 3 cents, an industrial plot, which was notified for sale and has been sold. It is stated that the buyer has deposited the sale consideration and possession also has been handed over. 3. In so far as the second security is concerned, that was also offered as collateral security. It is stated that after the sale was concluded a letter was issued to the petitioners calling upon them to W.P.(C) No. 8429 OF 2008 - 2 - remit the bid amount that was offered by the highest bidder and avert sale. According to the respondents there was no response from the petitioners as a result of which, the sale was confirmed in favour of the buyer. In view of this, Standing Counsel submits that the petitioners cannot seek the benefit of One Time Settlement Scheme or any other scheme at this distance of time. 4. From the facts as noticed it can be seen that both the properties have since been sold in a sale that was conducted by the respondents. Though the petitioner had an opportunity to avert the sale, that opportunity was not utilised by the petitioners. In view of all these, it is not possible to concede to the request of the petitioners to prevent the sale of the properties and give them the benefit of One Time Settlement Scheme. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-