AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Antony Dominic, J.—First petitioner had availed of a business loan and the 2nd petitioner is the guaranteer. When default was committed by the petitioners in paying the amount, Bank filed O.S. 869/11 before the Sub Court, Kollam, for recovery of the amount. That Suit is still pending. Meanwhile, it appears that the petitioners were offered the benefit of OTS Scheme. However, payment as required was not made. In such circumstances, revenue recovery action was initiated by the Bank by Ext. P7. To that notice, petitioners filed Ext. P8 objection. It is thereafter, that this writ petition has been filed. Although when the writ petition was admitted by this Court on 14.9.2012, this Court granted a stay on condition that the petitioners remit Rs. 50,000/- within three weeks, that payment has not been made so far.
One request of the petitioners is that, time for payment of the amount due under OTS Scheme should be enlarged so that the petitioners can pay the amount in terms thereof and avail of the benefit. It is seen that with this request, petitioners have made Ext. P5 representation to the 4th respondent.
OTS Scheme is a matter of agreement between the parties. Therefore, if any one of the conditions including those relating to the time of payment is to be modified, that can only be on a mutual agreement. Therefore, it is for the 5th respondent to consider that request of the petitioners and take a decision in the matter.
Insofar as the correctness of the validity of the revenue recovery action now initiated is concerned, admittedly, petitioners are defaulters. Bank is an institution invoking u/s 71 of the Revenue Recovery Act and the loan in question is a priority sector loan also. In such circumstances, revenue recovery action initiated cannot be said to be illegal. In such circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition directing that subject to compliance of the condition imposed by this Court by order dated 14.9.2012, the stay order granted will stand extended for a further period of one month. In the meantime, the 5th respondent will consider Ext. P5 representation made by the petitioners and communicate their decision thereof.
Petitioners will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 5th respondent for compliance.