IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2008 / 12TH POUSHA 1929 OP.No. 19838 of 2002(J) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JACOB THARAKAN, S/O.LATE ENASU THARAKAN, AGED 62 YEARS, M.35, CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR, KOCHI-33 BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY SRI.D.BIJU RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY OF FINANCE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER 3. SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (RR), KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, THRIKKAKARA NORTH VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.A.MANHU, SC, SIDCO SMT.SMITHA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.NO. 19838/2002 ORDER ON CMP NO. 33838/2002 IN O.P.NO. 19838/2002 DISMISSED. 02/01/2008 SD/- (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO PETIITONER DATED 21/05/1999. P2 : COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT TO PETIITONER DATED 05/07/2002. P3 : COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE, VELLOOR. P4 : COPY OF LETTER ISSUED FROM STEEL INDUSTRIES KERALA LTD. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------- O.P. No. 19838 of 2002 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 2nd day of January, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is challenging Ext.P2 notice for recovery of further sum of Rs.10,487.25 towards arrears due to 2nd respondent. Learned standing counsel for 2nd respondent submits that recoveries made were already adjusted and the balance amount demanded is still due from petitioner. However, on going through Ext.P1 issued by 2nd respondent, I find loan advanced was only for Rs.25,000/- in December 1993 against which petitioner has made payment of Rs.7,612/- to 2nd respondent and the Tahsildar recovered Rs.36,645/-. While the total collection is above Rs.44,000/- the claim made in Ext.P1 is only for Rs.43,449/-. The balance amount demanded is obviously towards collection charges and penal interest on interest. I feel, since liability is of the year 1995 and in view of payment made, which is little over the actual demand made by 2nd respondent inclusive of full interest, the balance demand for interest on interest and collection charge should be waived. Original petition is, accordingly, allowed quashing the impugned demands. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) jg