IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 29383 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.VIJAYAN NAIR, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR GANDHI NAGAR, BADADKA PO, CHENGALA VIA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR SMT.ANJU P.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /ARBITRATOR CUM SALE OFFICER, KASARAGOD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, KASARAGOD. 3. THE KASARAGOD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, RERPESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER KASARAGOD. ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN,SC,KASARGOD DIST.CO.BAN FOR R3 GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.S. MOHAMMED HASHIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 29383 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 25th November, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a defaulter in repayment of loan amounts due from him to the 3rd respondent -bank. In respect of the same, the arbitrator to whom the dispute was referred under Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, passed Ext. P2 award in ARC No.103/2004 on 28-4-2004. The petitioner did not pay the award amount. The bank initiated coercive recovery proceedings. It is under the above circumstances the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing Exts.P2, P3, P4, P5, P6 and P8; (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to reconsider Ext. P award taking note of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Hon'ble Court; (iii) declare that the petitioner is not liable to pay interest at the rate of 16% and penal interest at the rate of 3% as awarded by the 2nd respondent; (iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd respondent bank to permit the petitioner to avail the one time settlement scheme.” 2. On 16-10-2009, counsel for the 3rd respondent-bank submitted that the sale, which was under challenge, was adjourned and the petitioner's case has been included in the list of cases to be considered in the Adalath to be conducted from 2-11-2009 to 7-11- 2009. Accordingly, I directed the petitioner to participate in the Adalath. On 17-1-2009, I passed the following order: “It is submitted before me that in the Adalat parties appeared and the petitioner has been directed to pay an amount of W.P.C. No. 29383/09 -: 2 :- Rs. 1,58,742/- before 30-11-2009. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be given either time to pay that amount or installment facility. This is opposed by the counsel for the Bank. The counsel for the Bank would submit that this amount has been offered on condition that the petitioner would pay the same in a lump sum before 30-11-09 and that no further installment facility or time can be granted.” It is now submitted that the petitioner is prepared to pay the said amount of Rs. 1,58,742/- before 30-11-2009. In view of the said agreement, it is not necessary to consider this writ petition on merits. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/