Laly James vs The District Collector on 5 August, 2009

[Cites 2, Cited by 2]

Kerala High Court

Laly James vs The District Collector on 5 August, 2009

Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19523 of 2009(I)


1. LALY JAMES, W/O.JAMES.M.PAUL,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM.

3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KFC,

4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, KFC,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.EGY.N.ELIAS

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.JAJU BABU,SC,KERALA FINANCIAL COR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :05/08/2009

 O R D E R
                  P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                     W.P. (C) No. 19523 of 2009
                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                Dated, this the 5th day of August, 2009

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs. 4,16,500/- from the Kerala Financial Corporation, which however could not be repaid in time, which led to the coercive proceedings taken against the petitioner and the others. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the steps taken by the respondents stating that, no proceedings under Section 65 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act will lie against her by virtue of the statutory bar under Section 65 (4) (a). It is also pointed out that, the proceedings are barred by limitation as well. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that, the proceedings were initiated well within time and the ground of limitation as projected by the petitioner is not at all correct or sustainable under any circumstances. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that, no proceedings under Section 65 has been initiated against the petitioner and the idea and understanding of the petitioner to the contrary is quite misconceived simultaneously adding that such steps taken only against the guarantors to the loan.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is limiting the reliefs prayer for, only with respect to the statutory prescription under section 65 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery WP (C) No. 19523 of 2009 : 2 : Act, in view of the submission made from the part of the respondents that no steps as aforesaid to be pursued against the petitioner.

3. The position is recorded and the matter is disposed of accordingly leaving open all other issues.

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court