Kerala High Court
Idsi Technologies Private Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 31 July, 2025
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
2025:KER:57449
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2025 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 28215 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 IDSI TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
2ND FLOOR, THAPASYA BUILDING,
INFOPARK, KAKKANAD, KOCHI,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682030
2 RAJESH PONNAN,
AGED 52 YEARS,
S/O PONNAN P.,
DIRECTOR OF IDSI TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LTD,
RESIDING AT P 306, SANTH PAVANA BUILDINGS,
YUVAJANA SAMAJ ROAD, KADAVANTHRA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682020
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SAURAV B.
SMT.SAFNA P.S.
SMT.ROOPREKHA D.KAMATH
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION,
KAKKANAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682030
2025:KER:57449
W.P.(C) No.28215/2025
:2:
3 THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR),
KANAYANNUR, PARK AVE,
NEAR SUBHASH PARK,
MARINE DRIVE,
KOCHI, PIN - 682011.
4 THE STATE BANK OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
SME CITY CREDIT CENTRE KOCHI,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682018
BY ADV.
SMT.AMMINIKUTTY, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER,
SRI.JITHESH MENON, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 31.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:57449
W.P.(C) No.28215/2025
:3:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 31st day of July, 2025
The petitioners have approached this Court aggrieved
by the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance
made by the 4th respondent-Bank to the petitioners, invoking the
provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act.
2. The Bank paid ₹50,00,000/- to the petitioners
as Cash Credit Facility. The petitioners state that though the
petitioners made remittances promptly during the initial
repayment period of the financial advance, they could not pay
the instalments promptly later. The repayment of advance fell
into arrears later. It happened due to reasons beyond the
control of the petitioners.
3. Though the petitioners requested the Bank to
permit the petitioners to repay the outstanding amounts in easy
2025:KER:57449
monthly instalments, the Bank authorities were not yielding. The
authorities, instead, started coercive proceedings, invoking the
provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act and issued demand
notices.
4. The petitioners state that they are still in a
position to clear the outstanding amounts towards the 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 petitioners, they will be put to untold hardship
and loss.
5. Standing Counsel entered appearance on
behalf of the Bank and denied all the statements made by the
petitioners. The petitioners committed default in repaying the
credit facility.
6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioners
and required them to clear the dues. The petitioners deliberately
2025:KER:57449
omitted to do so. In the circumstances, the Bank had no other
go, than to proceed against the petitioners invoking the
provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act. The impugned notices
were issued in these circumstances. The petitioners have not
advanced any legal reasons to thwart the coercive proceedings
initiated by the Bank.
7. The Standing Counsel, however, submitted
that if the petitioners are 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 petitioners to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel
submitted that the outstanding amount due to the Bank from the
petitioners as on 31.07.2024 is ₹30,69,824/-.
8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioners and
the Standing Counsel representing the Bank. I have also heard
the Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 3.
2025:KER:57449
9. The specific case of the petitioners is that the
petitioners have been making the repayment and maintaining
the loan account initially. The default in maintenance of the
account occurred lately due to reasons beyond the control of the
petitioners. The petitioners have provided substantial security
which will safeguard the interest of the Bank.
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 petitioners to clear off the liability.
11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with
the following directions:
(i) The petitioners shall remit an amount
of ₹5 lakhs on or before 30.08.2025.
(ii) The petitioners shall remit the balance
outstanding amount in subsequent consecutive
18 equal monthly instalments thereafter, along
with accruing interest and other Bank charges,
2025:KER:57449
if any.
(iii) If the petitioners commit default in
making payments as directed above, the
respondents will be at liberty to continue with
coercive proceedings against the petitioners in
accordance with law.
(iv) If the petitioners pay the amount as
directed above, any coercive proceedings
against the petitioners will stand deferred.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
SR
2025:KER:57449
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28215/2025
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE RRC NO.
2025/10664/07 DATED 16.06.2025 ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
