Kerala High Court
Krishna Kumari.K.G vs The Kerala State Financial Enterprises ... on 12 April, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 14876 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
KRISHNA KUMARI.K.G
AGED 51 YEARS
W/O.LATE BIJU J.S, SHELL HOUSE, PEOPLES NAGAR - 197,
KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691008
BY ADVS.
PRATHEESH.P
ANJANA KANNATH
MARIYA JOSE
JOSHNA JOY
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,
THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
PIN - 680003
2 GENERAL MANAGER (BUSINESS)
THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,
HEAD OFFICE, "BHADRATHA", MUSEUM ROAD, P.B.NO.510,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680020
3 SPECIAL DEPUTY THAHASILDAR (RR)
THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,
CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
4 THE MANAGER
THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., BEACH
ROAD BRANCH, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
SRI.SALIL NARAYANAN K.A., SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 14876 OF 2024 2
JUDGMENT
Amidst the various assertions, averments and allegations in this writ
petition, when this matter was called today, the learned counsel for the
petitioner, confined her plea that the competent among the respondents
be directed to take up Ext.P2 representation and dispose it of, within a
time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. Smt.Mariya Jose - learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted
that her client has preferred Ext.P2 seeking, inter alia, the benefit of
insurance coverage for clearing the balance amounts towards the 'Chitty'
in question - the default in which, according to her, occurred only on
account of the untimely death of her client's husband late Biju J.S.
3. Sri.Salil Narayanan - learned Standing Counsel for the respondent
- Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. (KSFE), submitted that there is
no legal impediment in Ext.P2 being taken up and disposed of by
competent among the respondents; but prayed that this Court may not
make any affirmative declarations on the entitlement of the petitioner to
any relief and leave it to be decided by its competent Authority, in terms of
law. He concluded saying that the petitioner's stated pitiable condition
will be certainly kept in mind by the competent Authority and she will also
be given an opportunity of being heard.
Taking note of the afore submissions, I allow this writ petition and
direct the competent among the respondents to take up Ext.P2
representation of the petitioner and dispose of the same, after affording
her an opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an appropriate
order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not
later than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Needless to say, until such time as the afore is done and the
resultant order communicated to the petitioner, all further coercive
recovery action against her will stand deferred.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
MC/16.4
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14876/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF
SRI.BIJU DATED 20.12.2022 ISSUED FROM
THRIKKOVILVATTOM GRAMA PANCHAYAT
Exhibit P2 THE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED
27.1.2023
Exhibit P3 THE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEARING
NO.181 DATED 27.1.2023
Exhibit P4 THE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT BEARING NO.210/2021-115 DATED
15.3.2024
