High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 07 KL CK 0040

Muhammed vs The Deputy Tahsildar (Revenue Recovery) Ernad, Manjeri, Malappuram District Pin-676121 and The Branch Manager State Bank of Travancore, Cherukavu A.D.B. Branch Cherukavu, Malappuram District, Pin-673637

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 17 July 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) . No. 16091 of 2012 (J)

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 388 words

Justice P.R. Ramachandra Menon

APPENDIX

PETITIONER''S EXHIBITS :

EXT.P1

True copy of the notice issued by the first respondent dated 17/4/2012 as no.taluk (ernd r1) file no. 2012/252/10/100.

EXT.P2

True copy of the notice issued by the first respondent dated, 17/4/2012 as no.r3-212/l/12-13.

RESPONDENT''S EXHIBITS:

NIL

1.

The petitioner availed a loan of Rs. 3 lakhs from the respondent Bank in the year 2007, which in fact was under the ''Kissan Cash Credit Scheme''. Since there was no repayment to the satisfaction of the Bank, a requisition was sent to the revenue authorities to cause the due amount to be realised by deploying the machinery under the Revenue Recovery Act, which in turn is under challenge in this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the default was not wilful, but because of some unforeseen pecuniary circumstances and that the petitioner is ready to clear the entire liability, for which some breathing time is sought for, by way of reasonable instalments.

2.

The learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits, on instructions, that, after availing the loan in the year 2007, absolutely nothing was paid by the petitioner in respect of the timely instalments. The total amount due, to have the loan account closed as on date, as given in Ext.P1/P2 revenue recovery notice, is Rs. 5,03,430/ plus interest and such other charges. After hearing both the sides and also the persuasive submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner explaining the plight of the petitioner, this Court finds it fit and proper to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to clear the liability under the loan transaction by way of instalments. Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to clear the entire amount due by way of ''six'' equal monthly instalments. The first instalment shall be effected on or before the 10th of August 2012. It will be followed by similar instalments to be effected on or before the 10th of succeeding months. Subject to this, the recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. If the petitioner commits any default in remitting the amounts as above, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire dues in a lump, from the stage where it stands now.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.