Kerala High Court
Baby Francis vs The Tahsildar (Revenue Recovery) on 19 January, 2010
Author: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19545 of 2009(K)
1. BABY FRANCIS, KALAPPURACKAL PARAMBIL,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY),
... Respondent
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL
For Petitioner :SRI.V.G.ARUN
For Respondent :SRI.K.JAJU BABU,SC,KERALA FINANCIAL COR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :19/01/2010
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
-----------------------------------------------
WP(C) No. 19545 of 2009
---------------------------------------------
Dated, this the 19th day of January, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the recovery proceedings being pursued against him in respect of the amounts due to the 2nd respondent, under a loan transaction.
2. During the course of the proceedings, the petitioner came up with a proposal to clear the liability in a phased manner; simultaneously seeking for lifting of the attachment, expressing willingness to effect payment to the Kerala Financial Corporation as stipulated therein. After considering the submission made from either side, this Court passed an interim order dated 21st August, 2009, whereby the attachment was lifted for the time being and the Bank, who had issued Ext.P1 communication to the Kerala Financial Corporation coming to the rescue of the petitioner (making it clear that an amount of Rs.45,00,000/- had already been sanctioned and that the amount was not disbursed because of the attachment) was set at liberty to disburse the loan amount making it clear that, out of the total loan amount, a sum of Rs.41,44,603/- shall be caused to be paid by the Bank directly to the Kerala Financial Corporation and only the balance amount shall be disbursed to the petitioner. WPC NO.19545/2009 2
3. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent KFC submits that the condition imposed by this Court has not been fully satisfied by the petitioner, in so far as the petitioner has chosen to remit only about 37.7 lakhs and about 4.48 lakhs is yet to be paid to satisfy the condition in toto, besides such other expenses. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that, prior to passing the said order, the petitioner had already effected a payment of sum of Rs.1.3 lakhs; thus making the total payment somewhere near Rs.39 lakhs. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has filed a representation before the respondent KFC to waive the belated interest and such other expenses, to scale down the liability and to record satisfaction accordingly. It is stated that the same is being forwarded by the 2nd respondent to the Managing Director at Thiruvananthapuram, who is to consider the same and to pass appropriate orders thereon. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the KFC submits that unless and until the petitioner clears the balance amount as ordered by this Court as per interim order dated 21.08.2009, full clearance cannot be given and the recommendation cannot be forwarded to the head office. As such, the petitioner shall clear the balance amount, so as to top up the figure as shown in the interim order dated 21.08.2009, along with further expenses, if any and will be at liberty to file a fresh representation WPC NO.19545/2009 3 before the Manging Director of the KFC for redressal of his grievance with regard to the belated interest and such other expenses.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner might be spared of any 'collection charges' to be realised by the Revenue Authorities for having initiated the proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act since the dispute has been directly settled between the petitioner and the KFC. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent fairly brought it to the notice of this Court that the issue stands covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Malabar Organics Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala [2009 (4) KLT 328], wherein it has been observed in crystal-clear terms that, as far as the KFC and KSFE are concerned, no collection charges are liable to be realised by the Revenue authorities, as the expenses are being directly met by the KFC and KSFE, as the case may be (paragraph 6).
5. In the above facts and circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to record satisfaction of the payment to be made by the petitioner as stated above within a period of two weeks and forward all the necessary particulars for being considered by the appropriate authority in the head office, with regard to the claim for waiver of the belated interest and such other incidental expenses. On receipt of the representation in this regard, WPC NO.19545/2009 4 the matter shall be considered and finalised by the KFC as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month, of course after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
6. It is also made clear that, once the amount is paid by the petitioner as demanded by the 2nd respondent, the title deeds and other relevant records shall be released to the petitioner forthwith, at any rate, within one week from the date of clearance of the said amount.
The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc