The High Court of Kerala dismissed an original petition challenging an order for recovery of a fixed liability. The court held that the petitioner's voluntary admission of liability precludes challenging the amount.
The petition was dismissed holding that the petitioner's voluntary admission of liability prevents challenging the amount fixed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
MONDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 20TH MAGHA 1930
OP.No. 5524 of 2001(G)
PETITIONER(S):
T.A.SALINI, PAZHAYIDAM, KURICHITHANAM, UZHAVOOR, KOTTAYAM DIST.
BY ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM
SMT.URSULA FRANCIS
RESPONDENT(S):
SRI.K.P.HARISH SC FOR KHADI BOARD FOR R1 & R2
THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
O.P.No. 5524/01.
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
| P1. COPY OF |
THE CERTIFICATE. |
|---|---|
| P2. COPY OF |
THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD.1.8.85. |
| P3. COPY OF |
THE LETTER DTD.26.10.94. |
| P4. COPY OF |
THE LETTER OF OBJECTION AGAINST Ext.P3. |
| P5. COPY OF |
THE ORDER DTD.8.12.99. |
| P6. COPY OF |
THE RECEIPT DTD.8.12.99. |
| P7. COPY OF |
THE LETTER DTD.26.6.2000. |
| P8. COPY OF |
THE OBJECTION DATED 15.11.2000. |
| RESPO | NDENT(S)'EX | HIBITS: |
|---|---|---|
| R2A. | COPY OF THE | RELEVANT PAGES OF STOCK REGISTER. |
| B. | COPY OF THE | LETTER DTD.12.8.99. |
| C. | COPY OF THE | LETTER DTD.26.6.2000. |
Sdk+
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
O.P.No. 5524 of 2001
==================
==================
Dated this the 9th day of February, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is an employee of the Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board working as a Weaving Instructor. On account of audit objection, a liability of Rs.47,877/- was fixed as liability on the petitioner, for shortage of yarn in her custody. By Ext.P5, the petitioner was permitted to rejoin duty after leave on the petitioner remitting fifty per cent of the said amount of Rs.47,877/-. Subsequently the petitioner paid that amount and rejoined duty as is clear from Ext.P6. Later Ext.P7 order had been issued by the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent directing the 1st respondent to recover the balance amount outstanding against the petitioner in 24 equal monthly instalments and report compliance thereof. That is under challenge before me.
2
Rs.47,877/- and she herself requested that fifty per cent of the amount may be directed to be paid in lump sum and the balance amount in instalments, pursuant to which only Ext.P7 order has been issued.
which is not disputed by the petitioner, it is stated thus:
3
As such, the petitioner herself had voluntarily admitted liability in respect of Rs.47,877/- and she voluntarily offered to pay fifty per cent of the said amount in lump sum and the balance in instalments, which has been accepted by the respondents. In the above circumstances, the petitioner cannot now turn around and challenge the liability itself. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the original petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. It would be open to the petitioner to approach the respondents for appropriate reduction in interest if she is entitled to.
sdk+
Sd/S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
================
O.P.No. 5524 of 2001-G
================
J U D G M E N T
9th February, 2009
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can challenge the admitted liability after voluntarily offering to pay half in lump sum.
Whether the order directing recovery of the balance amount in instalments is sustainable.
T.A.SALINI
SMT.URSULA FRANCIS
THE PROJECT OFFICER, KERALA KHADI & VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, KOTTAYAM
THE SECRETARY, KERALA KHADI & VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
S.SIRI JAGAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
