Kerala State Financial ... vs C.R.Shaji
2021 Latest Caselaw 15774 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                         PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
   FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1943
                    RP NO. 386 OF 2021
 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.03.2021 IN WP(C) 7338/2021
            OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:

         KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED (KSFE)
         HEAD OFFICE, BHADRATHA,
         CHEMBUKAVU, MUSEUM ROAD,
         THRISSUR, PIN-680001
         REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

         BY ADV SHRI.SALIL NARAYANAN K.A., SC, KSFE LTD.


RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

         C.R.SHAJI,
         AGED 53 YEARS,
         S/o C.K.RAJAPPAN,
         CHERUPARAMBIL HOUSE,
         NADUVATHUNAGAR P.O.,
         CHERTHALA,
         ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-688559

         BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KUZHVATHAZHA


     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 RP.386/2021 in WPC.7338/2021
                                   :2 :




                               ORDER

~~~~~~

Dated this the 30th day of July, 2021

The petitioner-KSFE Limited is aggrieved by the

judgment dated 22.03.2021 in W.P.(C) No.7338/2021.

2. W.P.(C) No.7338/2021 was filed by the petitioner

as Managing Partner of a Company seeking to permit the

petitioner to remit the entire outstanding dues to the

respondent-KSFE Limited by 10 equal monthly instalments

commencing from 30.04.2021 and to direct the respondent to

consider and dispose of Ext.P4 representation with notice to

the petitioner.

3. The said writ petition was heard and disposed of

with the following directions:

"6. The petitioner appears to be a customer of the respondent with 141 Chits. The default in repayment seems to be a result of Covid-19 pandemic. The petitioner has shown his bonafides by remitting more RP.386/2021 in WPC.7338/2021

than ₹20 lakhs to clear the arrears, in March 2021. In the circumstances, this Court is of the view that time can be granted to the petitioner on conditions.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the petitioner to remit the outstanding amount to the respondent in 10 equal monthly instalments commencing from 15.04.2021. If the petitioner commits default in repayment of two consecutive instalments, the respondent will be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law."

Accordingly, the petitioner was permitted to clear the

outstanding amount in 10 equal monthly instalments

commencing from 15.04.2021.

4. Now, the review petition has been filed contending

that the petitioner has subscribed to a large number of chitties

and the petitioner is intending to bid other chitties for the

purpose of depositing the amount as directed by this Court.

This will create more and more liability and the liability of the

petitioner to KSFE Limited will be increasing. Ultimately, the

KSFE Limited is likely to suffer huge loss.

5. According to the review petitioner, a person who

adopts such tactics shall not be shown any indulgence by this

Court. Since the above facts cannot be brought to the notice RP.386/2021 in WPC.7338/2021

of this Court at the time of hearing of the writ petition, the

review petitioner seeks to recall the judgment and dismiss the

writ petition.

6. Heard learned counsel for the review petitioner and

learned counsel for the respondent.

7. The grievance of the review petitioner is that by

granting instalment facility to the petitioner, the petitioner will

be causing more loss to the KSFE Limited by bidding other

chitties and availing more prize amounts, which can ultimately

cause huge loss to the KSFE. This Court is of the view that

such a contention will not be sufficient to review the judgment

delivered in the writ petition. If the review petitioner is

competent under their terms of contract to prevent the

petitioner from bidding and availing more chitties, the

respondents are at liberty to do so. But, as long as the

petitioner complies with the directions given in the judgment

dated 22.03.2021, the review petitioner cannot have a legal

grievance.

RP.386/2021 in WPC.7338/2021

In the circumstances, this Court do not find any

error apparent on the face of the record to review the

judgment. The review petition is therefore dismissed.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/02.08.2021 RP.386/2021 in WPC.7338/2021

APPENDIX OF R.P.No.386/2021

REVIEW PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE R1(a) TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.64/13 DATED 1/11/13 ISSUED BY THE REVIEW PETITIONER

SR