SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 21845

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
LEKHA L. – Appellant
Versus
THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 8412 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: N.SASI, RASMI NAIR T., JITHENDRAN S., ARCHANA CHANDRAN K. K.
For the Respondents: P.C.ANIL KUMAR

The court has the discretion to modify salary recovery amounts in enforcement proceedings based on the petitioner's financial circumstances.

Headnote:The petitioner sought relief to quash a notice and to reduce the recovery amount from her salary. The court reviewed the case and noted that the recovery had been allowed to be reduced from Rs.25,000 to Rs.20,000. As the issue was resolved, the court closed the writ petition. This judgment is relevant to the enforcement of recovery actions and the discretion to modify amounts based on petitioner's circumstances.

Table of Content
1. petitioner sought reliefs regarding the recovery amount. (Para 1)
2. court allowed modification of recovery amount. (Para 2 , 3)

JUDGMENT

Petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:

“i. issue a writ or certiorari or any other appropriate writ or directions calling for records resulting in Ext.P1 notice, scrutinize and quash the same;

ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to respondents to sell the mortgaged properties first.”

Petitioner had availed a loan from the 1st respondent, and due to default in repayment, revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated. Recovery from the petitioner's salary was being effected at Rs. 25,000 per month. According to the petitioner, the recovery of the liability to the extent of Rs. 25,000/-per month from the salary is too exorbitant, and prayed for a reduction in the amount of recovery every month.

2. By an order dated 10.03.2026, this Court directed the 2nd respondent to consider any application submitted by the petitioner for reduction of the quantum of recovery from her salary to Rs.20,000/-.

3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, upon instructions, submitted that, pursuant to the order referred to above, the 2nd respondent has permitted reduction in recovery from the salary from Rs.25,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- alone per month.

In view of the above submission, which is recorded, nothing further survives for consideration. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top