Back
2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 3251
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. B. Suresh Kumar, J
KRISHNA PANICKER – Appellant
Versus
KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 13525/2015
A borrower is entitled to request a one-time settlement scheme as per the financial enterprise's policies upon default.
Headnote:
Loans - Writ Petition - Revenue Recovery Act - 1. Writs of Certiorari and Mandamus; 2. One Time Settlement Scheme.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners defaulted on chitty loan repayments to a financial enterprise, prompting recovery proceedings. They sought reliefs including quashing of proceedings and extending time for settlement under a specific scheme.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that time to settle had lapsed and granted a directive for any available one-time settlement scheme if the petitioners apply within a month. If not, they may repay in installments.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to the one-time settlement scheme for their loan repayment defaults.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the right to a one-time settlement must be granted if a valid application is made; otherwise, installment payment terms apply.
Final Decision: The court directed the financial enterprise to consider a one-time settlement application while establishing a repayment plan if no scheme is available.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners have availed a few chitty loans from the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd., ('the Financial Enterprises' for short). They have not remitted the instalments of the loans as agreed. Consequently, at the instance of the Financial Enterprises, proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act have been initiated against the petitioners. The petitioners have, therefore, approached this Court on 4.5.2015, seeking the following reliefs:
i. To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash Exts.P3 to P5 & P7 and all proceedings pursuant to thereon.
ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents to extent the benefit of one time settlement to clear the liability of petitioners by bringing down the rate of interest to 6% per annum and excluding penal interest and collection charges and to be given due credit of the dividend payable to petitioners within such time fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
iii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents to keep the proceedings pursuant to Exts.P3 to P5 & P7 in abeyance for a period of nine months to find out a prospective purchaser for the property of first petitioner and to sell it off to clear the amount quantified by way of one time settlement.
2. On 10.3.2016, this Court stayed the proceedings against the petitioners on condition that they shall pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- on or before 30.3.2016.
3. There is nothing on record to indicate as to whether the petitioners have complied with the condition imposed while passing the said interim order. Whatever that be, as is evident from the reliefs claimed in the writ petition, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking nine months time to liquidate the liability and also for a direction to extend the benefit of the one time settlement scheme of the Financial Enterprises, if any, available. The prayer for time to settle the liability has now become infructuous since more than nine months have elapsed after the institution of the writ petition. The only remaining relief is for a direction to the Financial Enterprises to extend the petitioners the benefit of the one time settlement scheme.
4. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of on the following lines:
(1) The first respondent is directed to extend to the petitioners the benefit of the one time settlement scheme, if any, in force, if an application for the said purpose is preferred by the petitioners within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
(2) If there is no one time settlement scheme in force as on today, the petitioners are permitted to liquidate the liability in eight equal monthly instalments commencing from 1.8.2016. It is made clear that if the petitioners commit default in payment of any of the instalments, the Financial Enterprises will be at liberty to realise the entire amount in lump.
