IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2009 / 29TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 5262 of 2008(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ PEETHAMBARAN, S/O.SREEDHARAN KRISHNA NIVAS, PERUMTHURUTH MURI, PONNAD P.O. AMBALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA (RTD. VEHICLE SUPERVISOR, KSRTC CHERTHALA DEPOT) BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER K.S.R.T.C., CHERTHALA DEPOT. 2. DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER K.S.R.T.C., ALAPPUZHA. 3. KERALA STATE HOUSING FEDERATION, KALOOR ERNAKULAM REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 4. THE THANNEERMUKKAM HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. ADV. SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C. FOR R1 & R2 SRI.A.K.CHINNAN FOR R3 SMT.SUSAL A. CHINNAN FOR R3 SRI.B.PRAMOD FOR R4 SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.5262/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO.845/07 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, CHERTHALA. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE FAMILY PENSION BOOK OF THE PETITIONER SHOWING THE RECOVERY OF DCRG IN FAVOUR OF 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE CHEQUE NO.146091 DT 5.2.2008. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION OF AUCTION SALE DT 24.2.2001, WITH AN OPTION FOR REDEMPTION ISSUED TO THE PETITIOENR BY THE SENIOR INSPECTOR/ARBITRATOR CUM SALE OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING FEDERATION LIMITED. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF AWARD DT 24.8.96 IN ARC 677/95 OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, CHERTHALA. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY CONSENT LETTER GIVEN BY TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 1.12.2007. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 1.12.2007 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 5262 OF 2008 (B) ===================== Dated this the 20th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was an employee of the KSRTC during 1992. He availed of a loan of Rs.60,000/- from the 4th respondent. Default was committed and ARC 677/95 was filed by the Society resulting in Ext.P4 award in its favour. Although mortgaged property was auctioned, the amount realised was not sufficient to satisfy the award. In the meantime, petitioner retired from service on 30/1/2004 and based on Ext.P5, the letter of consent executed, steps were initiated to recover the balance due from the DCRG due to the petitioner. It is thereupon the writ petition is filed. 2. The contention raised by the counsel is that in the absence of consent as contemplated under Note 1 to Rule 3 of Part III KSR, recovery cannot be effected from the DCRG. Reliance is also placed on the Division Bench judgment in P.S.Surendran v. Secretary, Mavelikkara Primary Co-op. Agrl. & Rural Development Bank (2005(3) KLJ 314). 3. However, learned counsel for the respondent Bank WPC 5262/08 :2 : points out that Ext.P5 consent does take within its fold the 4th respondent Society. It is stated that in the consent, what is excluded is the liability towards SCB No.A681, Thanneermukkam. It is stated that the 4th respondent is not a Service Co-operative Bank. Therefore the exclusion in Ext.P5 cannot apply to the 4th respondent. 4. Admittedly, liability has been incurred and the Bank is entitled to recover the same. On the other hand, if the liability is not to be recovered from the DCRG, certainly the exclusion of that liability in Ext.P5 should be specific. Going by Ext.P5, not only that it is not specific, but it pertains to a Service Co-operative Bank, and it cannot be the 4th respondent, which is only a Housing Society. If that be so, I am not prepared to hold that the 4th respondent cannot recover its dues. Writ petition will therefore stand dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp