Disposed

C.P.Manilal v. the Deputy Tahasildar

Kerala HC27 Sept 2016WP(C)/25905/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging recovery proceedings with waiver of coercive action under specific sections of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act allowing the petitioner to pay the loan in installments.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to repay loan in eight equated monthly installments starting 15.10.2016; proceedings under Section 7 kept in abeyance; Section 34 proceedings to be guided by petitioner's conduct.

C.P.Manilal Vs the Deputy Tahasildar — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/5TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 25905 of 2016 (K)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

C.P. MANILAL, S/O.PRABHAKARAN,

¶8

AGED 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHETHIKATTIL VEEDU, CHAZHOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH P.NAIR.

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, THRISSUR-680 020.

¶12

2. VILLAGE OFFICER, CHAZHUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR -680 001.

¶13

3. THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, TRIPRAYAR BRANCH, THRISSUR-680 001.

¶14

R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.K. ARAVINDA KUMAR BABU. R3 BY SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN, SENIOR SC, ADV. SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR, SC.

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

rs.

¶17

WP(C).No. 25905 of 2016 (K)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶20

EXHIBIT-P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PASS BOOK AND RECEIPTS SHOWING THE REMITTANCE OF LOAN AMOUNT. EXHIBIT-P2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE RECEIPT BY THE PETITIONER.

¶21

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

SHAJI P. CHALY, J

¶26

W.P.(C). NO. 25905 OF 2016

¶27

Dated this the 27^th day of September, 2016

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

Petitioner has availed a business loan of Rs. 75,000/-

¶30

during the year, 2006 from the third respondent bank. According to the petitioner, loan was availed for the purpose of conducting a provision store. As per the terms and conditions of the said loan, petitioner used to remit amount on daily basis and the same continued till the year 2009 and thereafter, petitioner paid some amount in lump. According to the petitioner, altogether the petitioner has remitted an amount of Rs. 99,000/- towards the said loan. The balance amount was not paid by the petitioner, since the petitioner was not aware of the balance outstanding due towards the loan account.

¶31

However, it is admitted that on the basis of the amounts due from the petitioner, third respondent bank has initiated recovery proceedings evident from Ext. P2 and

¶32

W.P.(C). NO. 25905 OF 2016 2

¶33

coercive action initiated, under Sections 7 and 34 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. It is in this backdrop seeking appropriate direction, petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition.

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and the Standing Counsel appearing for the third respondent bank, and perused the documents on record and the pleadings put forth.

¶35

Even though petitioner has raised various contentions in the writ petition, with respect to the falsity in the quantification of the amount as contained under Ext.P1, it is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that if reasonable time is provided to the petitioner to pay off the outstanding amounts, evident from Ext.P2, the same will be paid by the petitioner in reasonable equated monthly installments. Taking note of the respective submissions made across the bar, I am satisfied that a leniency can be shown to the petitioner, taking into account the contentions put forth by the petitioner in the writ petition. Therefore,

¶36

W.P.(C). NO. 25905 OF 2016 3

¶37

petitioner is permitted to repay the loan amount outstanding as per Ext. P2, in eight equated monthly installments starting from 15.10.2016 and pay the balance installments on the same day of the succeeding months. Needless to say, if any of the installments is defaulted by the petitioner, bank will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with Ext. P2 proceedings. It is made clear that the proceedings initiated under Section 7 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act shall be kept in abeyance, in order to ascertain the bonafides of the petitioner with respect to the payment offered and directed above. However, the proceedings pursuant to Section 34 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act will be guided by the conduct of the petitioner in due course, in accordance with the directions contained above.

¶38

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶39

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶40

DCS

C.P.Manilal v. the Deputy Tahasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.P.Manilal v. the Deputy Tahasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Danu Maheendran Vs State of Kerala

Mariyakutty Vs the Tahsildar

K v Mohanan @ Mohankumar Vs the State of Kerala

The Managing Committee, Tiruvalla East Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs the State Co-Operative Election Commission

Arumughan Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

Mr. Jamal Vs District Collector