Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 3063
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
GOPINATH P, J
SINDHU PREMAN – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM – Respondent
WP(C) 15860/2016
The court reinforced that compliance with ordered payment schedules is critical, especially in long-pending financial disputes.
Headnote:
Writ - Loan Recovery - N/A - The court addressed issues concerning writ petitions, interim orders, and loan recovery, emphasizing strict compliance with payment schedules and the jurisdiction of the court in enforcing such terms.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash revenue recovery notices and to regularize a margin money loan. The court had previously granted an interim order requiring the petitioner to deposit a certain amount.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the petitioner to pay the arrears in 12 equal monthly installments, asserting no further extensions would be provided, emphasizing the need for compliance with the repayment schedule.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be allowed to regularize the loan and extend time for payment of arrears.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was grounded on the petitioner’s lack of compliance over several years and the necessity for timely debt settlement through specified repayment plans.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of allowing installment payment, with strict conditions imposed.
Dated this the 12th day of April, 2024 This writ petition was filed in the year 2016 seeking the following reliefs:
- “i) Call for the records relating to Exts.P1 to P7 from the respondents;
- ii) Quash Exts.P5 and P6 revenue recovery notices by a writ of certiorai or any other writ, order or direction;
- iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the 4th respondent to regularize the margin money loan and grant installment facility to clear the loan arrears:
- iv) Such other relief’s which is deemed to be fit and proper to this honourable court in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. When this writ petition was admitted on 26.4.2016, an interim order was granted on condition that the petitioner deposits Rs.40,000/- within a period of one month.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks further time to get instructions. However, considering the limited nature of the reliefs sought and the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to pay off the WP(C) NO. 15860 OF 2016 present arrears in 12 equal monthly instalments commencing from 30.5.2024. The subsequent instalments shall be paid on or before the last working day of the succeeding months. The petitioner shall approach the 4th respondent with a copy of this judgment and the 4th respondent shall intimate the petitioner of the liability payable by the petitioner as on today.
Considering the fact that the writ petition has been pending before this Court from 2016 onwards and since the petitioner has got considerable opportunity to settle the liability, no further extension of time will be granted under any circumstances. If the petitioner does not clear the liability as aforesaid, the recovery proceedings against her may continue.
