Manimol Johnson vs The Managing Director
2024 Latest Caselaw 25759 Ker

Kerala High Court

Manimol Johnson vs The Managing Director on 30 September, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

                                              2024:KER:72650
W.P.(C) No.34175/2024
                              :1:

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 8TH ASWINA, 1946

                    WP(C) NO. 34175 OF 2024

PETITIONER:

           MANIMOL JOHNSON,
           AGED 53 YEARS,
           W/O JOHNSON GEORGE KANJIKKAL,
           KARAVALOOR.P.O,
           PUNALUR, KOLLAM,
           NOW RESIDING AT GOPURAM,
           MANARCADU,
           KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686019

           BY ADV.SRI.AL IRSHANA SHEMEEN C.S.


RESPONDENTS:

    1      THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
           THE KERALA STATE FINACIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED,
           BHADRADA, P.B.NO.510,
           MUESUM ROAD,
           CHEMBUKKAVU, THRISSUR,
           PIN - 680020

    2      THE MANAGER,
           THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED,
           PUNALUR-1 BRANCH, PUNALUR,
           KOLLAM DISTRICT,
           PIN - 691305

           BY ADV.SRI.P PRIJITH, (SC)

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP          FOR
ADMISSION ON 30.09.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME          DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                     2024:KER:72650
W.P.(C) No.34175/2024
                                 :2:




                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 30th day of September, 2024

The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved

by the coercive proceedings for recovery of chit amount made

by the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. to the

petitioner, invoking the provisions of the Revenue Recovery

Act.

2. The petitioner availed a chitty loan of ₹10

lakhs from the 2nd respondent in the year 2018. The

petitioner states that though the petitioner made remittances

promptly during the initial repayment period, she could not

pay the subscriptions promptly later. The repayment of

subscription fell into arrears later. It happened due to

reasons beyond the control of the petitioner.

3. Though the petitioner requested the

respondents to permit the petitioner to repay the outstanding 2024:KER:72650

amounts in easy monthly instalments, the respondents were

not yielding. The authorities, instead, started coercive

proceedings, invoking the provisions of the Revenue

Recovery Act and issued Ext.P1 notice.

4. The petitioner states that she is still in a

position to clear the outstanding amounts towards the chitty

loan, if sufficient time is given to clear the dues in easy

monthly instalments. If the respondents are permitted to

continue with the coercive proceedings and auction the

secured assets provided by the petitioner, she will be put to

untold hardship and loss.

5. Standing Counsel entered appearance on

behalf of the respondents and denied all the statements

made by the petitioner. On behalf of the respondents, it is

submitted that the petitioner had availed the chitty loan in the

year 2018. The petitioner committed default in repayment.

6. The respondents repeatedly reminded the

petitioner and required her to clear the dues. The petitioner

deliberately omitted to do so. In the circumstances, the 2024:KER:72650

respondents had no other go, than to proceed against the

petitioner invoking the provisions of the Revenue Recovery

Act. The impugned Ext.P1 notice was issued in these

circumstances. The petitioner has not advanced any legal

reasons to thwart the coercive proceedings initiated by the

respondents.

7. The Standing Counsel, however, submitted

that if the petitioner is ready and willing to make a substantial

payment soon and remit the balance outstanding amount

immediately thereafter, a short breathing time can be granted

to the petitioner to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel

submitted that the outstanding amount due to the

respondents from the petitioner as on 30.09.2024 is

₹7,95,500/-.

8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner

and the Standing Counsel representing the respondents.

9. The specific case of the petitioner is that the

petitioner has been making the repayment and maintaining

the account initially. The default in repayment occurred lately 2024:KER:72650

due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioner. The

petitioner has provided substantial security which will

safeguard the interest of the respondents.

10. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I

am inclined to dispose of the writ petition giving a short and

reasonable time to the petitioner to clear off the liability.

11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with

the following directions:

(i) The petitioner shall remit the

outstanding amount of ₹7,95,500/- in 20

consecutive and equal monthly installments

along with accruing interest and other

administrative charges, if any. First of such

installments shall be paid on or before

30.10.2024.

(ii) If the petitioner commits default in

making payments as directed above, the

respondents will be at liberty to continue with

coercive proceedings against the petitioner 2024:KER:72650

in accordance with law.

(iii) If the petitioner pays the amount as

directed above, any coercive proceedings

against the petitioner will stand deferred.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE SR 2024:KER:72650

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34175/2024

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.12.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

Exhibit-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 5-02- 2024 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.25,000/-

ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SLIP ISSUED FROM THE GENERAL HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM, DATED 22.08.2024.

Exhibit-P3(A) COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED 11.09.2024 ISSUED FROM THE GENERAL HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM.