IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2011 / 6TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17240 of 2011(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- THRESSIAMMA, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O. CHANDRAN, THYPARAMBIL HOUSE, KOLLAMPATTADA P.O., KUMILY, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.ASHA P.KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. PEERUMEDU TALUK SAHAKARANA KARSHIKA VIKASANA BANK NO.1-273, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HEAD OFFICE, ELAPPARA P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685588 2. THE SALE OFFICER, PEERUMEDU TALUK SAHAKARANA KARSHIKA VIKASANA BANK NO.I-273, HEAD OFFICE, ELAPPARA P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685588 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.S. ABDUL SALAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17240 of 2011 APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF TH NOTICE DATED 20.5.2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OFTHE REPRESENTATION DATED 2.6.2011 SENT BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATD 20.6.2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE. Kp/ P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 17240 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ext.P3 demand notice dated 20.6.2011 issued by the first respondent bank calling upon the petitioner to pay the sum of Rs.1,40,000/- on or before 28.6.2011 is under challenge in this writ petition. It is contended that Ext.P3 notice is arbitrary and illegal and that it has been issued without considering the request made by the petitioner in Ext.P2 for an opportunity to pay the amount demanded in instalments. Before Ext.P3 was issued, the first respondent bank had sent Ext.P1 notice dated 20.5.2011 calling upon the petitioner to pay the outstanding instalments. The total amount demanded was Rs.1,35,231/-. Since the petitioner did not pay any amount pursuant to the said demand, Ext.P3 notice was issued. 2. A reading of Exts.P1 and P3 notices disclose that the first respondent bank has only called upon the petitioner to clear the overdue instalments and not to close the loan transaction. Such being the situation, I find no reason to interfere with Ext.P3. Under section 19 of the Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Banks Act, in the event of the petitioner committing default in repaying the loan availed by her, the first respondent bank is entitled to issue Exts.P1 and P3 notices demanding payment of the overdue instalments. I therefore find no grounds to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No./2011 2