Kerala High Court
K.G. Mariyam vs The Deputy Tahsildar (Rr)
Author: K.Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
TUESDAY,THE 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/15TH ASWINA, 1936
WP(C).No. 27863 of 2004 (P)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
--------------------
K.G. MARIYAM,
W/O.JOHNSON,
PADAMATTUMMAL HOUSE,
P.O.AZHIKODE JETTY,
THRISSUR.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN
SRI.K.S.RAJESH
SRI.M.BIJU KUMAR
RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR),
TALUK OFFICE, KODUNGALLUR.
2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE, AZHIKODE,
KODUNGALLUR.
3. THE MATSYAFED,
DISTRICT OFFICE, WEST FORT,
P.O.POOTHOLE, THRISSUR.
4. THE AZHIKODE MATSYATHOZHILALI VIKASANA
KSHEMA SAHAKARANA SANGHAM LTD.,
REP. BY THE SECRETARY, LIGHT HOUSE JUNCTION
P.O. AZHIKODE, KODUNGALLUR.
R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. R. RANJITH
R3 BY ADV. SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC
R4 BY ADVS. SRI.K.K.M.SHERIF
SRI.P.M.KUNJIMOIDEENKUTTY
SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED ASHROF
SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH
SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN
SMT.K.K.RATNALATHA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-10-2014,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
...2/-
WP(C).No. 27863 of 2004 (P)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :
EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD DATED 12.7.96.
EXT.P2 COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 15.9.03 ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P3 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 7.3.02 ISSUED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P4 COPY OF THE RR NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED
4.12.03.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
Mn
K. Vinod Chandran, J.
====================================
W.P.(C)No.27863 of 2004
====================================
Dated this the 7th day of October, 2014.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is aggrieved by the recovery proceedings initiated for satisfaction of the loan availed by her, stated to have been availed on behalf of the fourth respondent, from the third respondent. Petitioner's contention is that the loan was availed on behalf of the fourth respondent and the petitioner has no liability towards that end. To substantiate her contention, she has produced Ext.P3 which was issued by the fourth respondent in the case of another borrower. However, it is pertinent to note that, since Ext.P3 certificate has been issued by the fourth respondent in the name of another member, this Court cannot give any benefit to the petitioner on that ground. It is to be specifically noted that Ext.P2 notice issued by the fourth respondent is in the name of the petitioner and the same indicates that the loan was availed by the petitioner for her own purpose. In W.P.(C)No.27863 of 2004 -:2:- such circumstance, the petitioner is definitely not entitled to any relief and has to satisfy the loan amount. The writ petition is, hence, dismissed.
K. Vinod Chandran, Judge.
sl.