IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2009 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 30327 of 2009(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SREEJITH M.D, S/O.DIVAKARAN NAMBOOTHIRI MANAYATHATTUMANA, MUPLIYAM VILLAGE MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.SAJU J.VALLYARA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR) MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. SRI.ANISH P.A., S/O.APPU PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MATTATHURKUNNU PO MATTATHUR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.R.S.KALKURA, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 30327 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. Petitioner is the guarantor with respect to a loan availed by the 3rd respondent from the 2nd respondent Bank. Both the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent were traders who had availed cash credit facility on the basis of mutual guarantee. It is admitted case that the petitioner has cleared payments of the loan availed by him, to which the 3rd respondent was a guarantor. But the 3rd respondent had defaulted payment in the loan availed by him to which the petitioner stood as guarantor. 2. Consequent to default committed by the 3rd respondent recovery steps have now been initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 notice issued under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. Limited prayer of the petitioner is for granting reasonable time for payment of the liability, in installments. W.P.(C)No. 30327 of 2009 -2- 3. Standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent Bank, on the basis of instructions, submitted that the petitioner can approach the 2nd respondent seeking 'One Time Settlement' under a scheme which is prevailing, wherein waiver of interest and expenses to the possible extent will be considered. 4. By virtue of an interim order issued by this court on 27.10.2009 the petitioner had effected payment of a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only). Having considered facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be relegated to the 2nd respondent to seek settlement in the loan account, under the One Time Settlement Scheme/Compromise Settlement. 5. Therefore the petitioner is directed to file a representation in this regard before the 2nd respondent within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If such request is made, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same treating the payment of Rs.20,000/- made pursuant to the interim order, as W.P.(C)No. 30327 of 2009 -3- amount which is pre-requisite for consideration of One Time Settlement. A decision in this regard shall be taken and intimated to the petitioner as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of such request. Needless to say that the petitioner shall be provided with reasonable opportunity for installment payment, with respect to the balance amount settled. 6. In order to facilitate the petitioner to approach the Bank and for the Bank to take a decision regarding settlement, coercive steps of recovery now initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 notice is directed to keep in abeyance for a period of two months from today. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE shg/