IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2009 / 3RD ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17527 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.K.BALAKRISHNAN, S/O.GOVINDAPILLA, AGED 73 YEARS, NELLAMPURATH HOUSE, KEEZHILLAM KARA, RAYAMANGALAM, PERUMBAVOOR. BY ADV. SRI.ROY THOMAS SRI.N.M.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR & CHIEF REVENUE OFFICER, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, DIVISION-II, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, BRANCH OFFICE, PERUMBAVOOR. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.MATHEW VADAKKEL FOR 1 & 3 BY MR. A.JAYASANKAR, SC FOR 2 & 4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No. 17527 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 24 th June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner had availed a housing loan from the respondent -Housing Board way back in 1992 for renovation of his residential building. It is the case of the petitioner that though he had been effecting repayment, there occurred some defaults in the repayment of the loan. Finally, the petitioner, in response to the steps taken by the Board, cleared the entire liability and the receipt dated 01.03.2008 issued by the Board on remittance of a sum of Rs.50,000/- has been produced as Ext.P1. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, after having cleared the entire loan transaction, there was absolutely no rhyme or reason for the respondent Bank for having issued Ext.P2 demand notice proposing to attach the property in respect of the alleged dues from the petitioner, showing the outstanding liability as more than Rs. Two lakhs. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that on receipt of Ext. P2, the petitioner approached the first respondent by filing Ext. P3 representation pointing out the actual facts and figures, particularly as to the settlement of W.P.(C) No. 17527 OF 2009 2 loan under the 'OTS'. The said representation is stated as made in response to the specific instruction given in Ext. P2 causing the petitioner to submit objection, if any, in response to the said notice. 2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank as well. 3. After considering the facts and figures, the respondent Bank is hereby directed to consider Ext. P3 representation with reference to the relevant records and to pass appropriate orders thereon, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. It is made clear that, till such time, all further coercive steps stated as being pursued against the petitioner pursuant to Ex.P2 shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk