Yoosuf Hyder M vs The Chairman
2023 Latest Caselaw 11745 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
   THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1945
                       WP(C) NO. 37927 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          YOOSUF HYDER M., AGED 43 YEARS
          S/O MOHAMMED, BUSHRA MANZIL, KODIYAL,HEROOR, KASARGOD
          DISTRICT, PIN - 671324

          BY ADV DEEPAK RAJ



RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE CHAIRMAN
          THE KERALA STATE BACKWARD CLASSES DEVELOPMENT
          CORPORATION LTD, REGD OFFICE TC 27/588(7) &
          (8),SENTINEL,2ND FLOOR, PATTOOR, VANCHIYOOR P O,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695035

    2     THE BRANCH MANAGER
          THE KERALA STATE BACKWARD CLASSES DEVELOPMENT
          CORPORATION LTD, HIGH LANE PLAZA, ANEBAGILU, M G ROAD,
          KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671012

    3     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF CO-OPERATION,
          ROOM NO: 397, 1ST FLOOR, MAIN BLOCK, SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695001

    4     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
          KASARAGOD DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION, VIDYANAGAR,
          KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671123

          SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SC, KSBCDC
          SRI.SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE - GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 37927 OF 2023
                                  2


                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner asserts that the action of the respondents,

in having issued to him Exts.P3 and P4 demand notice under

Section 34 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act is illegal and

unlawful because, he has substantially repaid the loan which he

had availed of from the Kerala State Backward Classes

Development Corporation Ltd. (for short 'the Corporation') - of

which respondents 1 and 2 are the Chairman and Branch

Manager respectively.

2. Sri.Deepak Raj - learned counsel for the petitioner,

vehemently argued that his client is now in an extreme

financial crisis, which has been exacerbated on account of the

disruption caused by the Covid - 19 pandemic and that he is

not in a position to pay any amount as has been demanded

against him. He reiteratingly argued that his client has already

paid off the liability substantially, if not fully; and therefore that

the demand for a further amount of Rs.2,42,826/- is illegal. He,

therefore, prayed that Exts.P3 and P4 be set aside.

3. Sri.M.Sasindran - learned standing counsel for

respondents 1 and 2, on the contrary, submitted that if the

petitioner requires a detailed statement of account, it can be WP(C) NO. 37927 OF 2023

given to him; and asserted that an amount of Rs.2,42,826/- is

due in his account as on 16.11.2023. He added that if the

petitioner requires, he can also approach his client for

permission to pay off the amounts either under a One-Time

Settlement, as may be available; or through instalments, which

can also be considered.

4. Sri.Deepak Raj - learned counsel for the petitioner, in

reply, submitted that his client will make a representation

before the competent Authority of the Corporation for a copy of

the account as of today, so that he can then take a decision as

to the manner in which he must deal with it. He prayed that,

however, this Court may leave him sufficient time for invoking

such remedies.

5. The afore request of the petitioner certainly appeals to

this Court because he asserts that he had taken a loan of only

Rs.3,00,000/- in the year 2016 and paid off more than

Rs.2,50,000/- thereafter. Obviously, the accounts with respect

to his loan will have to be scrutinized and verified by the

Corporation, before Revenue Recovery action can be confirmed

against him. When the petitioner asserts that he has paid

substantially, I am certain that he is entitled to some latitude. WP(C) NO. 37927 OF 2023

In the afore circumstances, this writ petition is ordered

with the following directions:

(a) All Revenue Recovery action pursuant to Exts.P3 and

P4 will stand deferred for a period of sixty days from the date

of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(b) The petitioner will, within a period of fifteen days

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, approach

the Corporation with a representation seeking the statement of

account, as also for any benefit that he may require - including

paying off the loan liability in lump sum either under a One

time Settlement, or in instalments as he may choose to pay.

(c) On the direction (b) above being complied with by the

petitioner, the competent Authority of the Corporation will

favour him with a statement of account, as also with a

proceeding as to the manner in which it can be paid - either

under a One Time settlement or in instalments. This shall be

communicated to him as expeditiously as is possible.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 37927 OF 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37927/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN PASSBOOK OF THE PETITIONER

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 06.10.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2NDRESPONDENT

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 06.10.2023 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONER

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 07.10.2023 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER