IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 6487 OF 2011 (I) ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st September, 2011 1. MANJUMOL, W/O.ASHISH, ... Petitioner Vs 1. THE NEELUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE ... Respondent 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE 3. THE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT For Petitioner :SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) For Respondent :SRI.GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW JUDGMENT The petitioner is a person whose property has been sold by the first respondent in auction towards recovery of the loan arrears due from her. According to the petitioner, it was her uncle who had taken the loan and the property of the petitioner had been given as security for the loan transaction. The property was sold on 15-9-2003 and the bank purchased the same for an amount of Rs.1,36,042/- (Rupees one lakh thirty six thousand forty two only). Though the petitioner had submitted Exts.P1 to P3 representations seeking reconveyance of the property, her complaint is that no action has been taken on those representations till date. Ext.P6 is the last representation submitted by the petitioner. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the first respondent bank stating that though the bank had purchased the property for an amount of Rs.1,36,042/- (Rupees one lakh thirty six thousand forty two only), the total expenditure incurred by the bank works out to Rs.3,07,386/- (Rupees three lakhs seven thousand three hundred and eighty six only) as on 31-3-2011. However, the bank is willing to give suitable remission to the petitioner so as to enable her to save her property. 3. At the time of arguments, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the Registrar of Co-operative Societies has issued a circular captioned as "Ashwas 2011", as per the terms of which the bank is not entitled to claim interest in excess of the principal amount. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to the benefits of the said circular. Counsel for the first respondent bank replied to the above submission by stating that no request under the circular referred to by the counsel for the petitioner has been submitted to the bank yet. If a request as contemplated by the circular is submitted, the same would certainly be considered by the bank. The limited relief that is sought by the petitioner is a direction to the bank to consider the request of the petitioner for reconveyance of the property, in the light of the circular referred to above. 4. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh request, in terms of the circular captioned as "Ashwas 2011". If such representation is submitted to the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the first respondent . shall consider the same in accordance with law and shall pass appropriate orders thereon extending to the petitioner all concessions and benefits to which she is eligible as per the relevant circulars in force. The representation submitted by the petitioner shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the petitioner's representation. Ordered accordingly. K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj |