Kerala High Court
Shibu K.V vs Kerala State Financial ... on 25 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022/5TH MAGHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 2059 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:
1 SHIBU K.V., S/O.VARGHESE,
AGED 55 YEARS, KOLLAMAVUPARAMBIL,
MANJUMMAL P.O., ELOOR,
ERNKAULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 501.
2 SIMI SHIBU, W/O.SHIBU,
AGED 42 YEARS, KOLLAMAVUPARAMBIL,
MANJUMMAL P.O., ELOOR,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 501.
BY ADVS.
SANTHOSH PETER (MAMALAYIL)
P.N.ANOOP
M.S.SANDEEP SUDHAKARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES (KSFE) LTD.,
ALUVA BRANCH NO.II, PUTHUSSERY COMPLEX,
NEAR GOVT. HOSPITAL, ALUVA, PIN - 683 101
REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER.
2 SPECIAL DEPUTY THAHASILDAR(RR)
KSFE LTD., ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 018.
BY SRI.ANIL KUMAR P.C., SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 25.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C)No.2059/2022
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 25th day of January, 2022
The petitioners are permanent residents of Manjummal.
The petitioners seek to quash Ext.P4 auction notices issued
by the 2nd respondent.
2. The 1st petitioner joined two chitties conducted by
the 1st respondent through one of the agent of the 1 st
respondent, namely Muraleedharan. The 2nd petitioner stood
as surety for one transaction. The petitioners alleged that
the agent of the 1st respondent collected money from the 1st
petitioner, but the money was not remitted to the KSFE. In
the year 2016, the petitioner wanted to auction one chitty.
After the auction conducted, the amount was handed over to
the 1st petitioner. The 1st petitioner entrusted a title deed by
way of security to the agent.
WP(C)No.2059/2022
3. It is the case of the 1st petitioner that in 2016, the
1st petitioner came to know that the agent enrolled in many
chitties in the name of the 1 st petitioner without the
knowledge or permission of the 1 st petitioner. The agent
pledged sale deeds of the petitioners for availing money
from the other chitties. The 1st petitioner filed private
complaint before the Magistrate's Court. The Police has filed
a Referral Report. The 1st petitioner had filed protest
complaint which is pending now.
4. In the meanwhile, the petitioners have been
served with demand notices under the Revenue Recovery
Act. Thereupon, the petitioners approached the 1 st
respondent and requested for proper verification and enquiry
on the loan transaction. The 1st respondent has not
conducted any enquiry. The 2nd respondent is claiming an
amount of `6,32,057/- with interest from the petitioners.
Unless the revenue recovery proceedings are stayed, the
WP(C)No.2059/2022
petitioners will be put to untold hardship and loss.
5. The learned Standing Counsel for the KSFE
entered appearance and controverted all the material
contentions made by the writ petitioners. The Standing
Counsel submitted that the 1st petitioner has availed chitties
and as on 31.01.2022, an amount of `10,63,212/- is
outstanding. As the 1st petitioner did not remit the amount
inspite of repeated requests, the 1st respondent has resorted
to revenue recovery proceedings. However, if the petitioners
are willing to pay the entire amount of `10,63,212/-, a
breathing time can be granted to the petitioners to remit the
amount in instalments.
6. The learned Standing Counsel also submitted that
a One Time Settlement Scheme is available now and if the
petitioners opt to settle the disputed amount under the One
Time Settlement Scheme, the dues can be settled for an
amount of `6,90,682/-.
WP(C)No.2059/2022
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the
respondents.
8. The 1st petitioner states that he has joined only
two chitties, but due to manipulations committed by a third
party, the title deed of the petitioners was misused for
obtaining money under various chitties. The 1 st petitioner
has not pledged the property for availing other chitties.
9. Taking into consideration the entire facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the
1st petitioner has to resort to other civil and criminal remedies
for redressal of his grievances as to the manipulations
committed by 3rd party. However, in the facts of the case, the
petitioners can be granted a reasonable time to remit the
entire amount in instalments.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with
the following directions:
WP(C)No.2059/2022
(1) The petitioners shall remit an amount of ` 1 lakh
within a period of one month.
(2) The balance amount out of `10,63,212/- and
accruing interest shall be paid within 18 equal monthly
instalments thereafter.
(3) If the petitioners commit two consecutive defaults in
making repayment as directed above, the respondents will
be at liberty to go ahead with revenue recovery proceedings.
(4) In the meanwhile, if the petitioners come forward for
settlement of accounts through One Time Settlement
Scheme during the period when the Scheme is available, the
respondents shall consider the application of the petitioners
for One Time Settlement Scheme.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
ncd/25.01.2022
WP(C)No.2059/2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2059/2022
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT
FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE
THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT, ALUVA DATED 12/06/2017.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
12/11/2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE
DEPUTY SUPERINTEND OF POLICE,
VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICES UNDER
SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT
DATED 19/11/2019 & 27/12/2019 OF THE
1ST AND 2ND PETITIONERS.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE AUCTION NOTICES
DATED 19/11/2019 AND 04/01/2020
ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER.
