High Court Kerala High Court

A.N.Bhat vs Anugraha Charitable Trust on 28 March, 2008

Kerala High Court
A.N.Bhat vs Anugraha Charitable Trust on 28 March, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 492 of 2008()


1. A.N.BHAT, S/O.LATE NARAYANA BHAT,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. ANITHA A.BHAT, W/O.A.N.BHAT,
3. N.N.BHAT, S/O.NARAYANA BHAT, VIII/524,

                        Vs



1. ANUGRAHA CHARITABLE TRUST, CHITTOOR ROAD
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBT RECOVERY

3. INDIAN BANK, BRANCH OFFICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.R.VENKETESH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH

 Dated :28/03/2008

 O R D E R
                         H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.M. JOSEPH, J.
                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                           WRIT APPEAL No. 492 of 2008
                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                        Dated this the 28th day of March, 2008.

                                          JUDGMENT

H.L.DATTU, CJ,

This appeal is directed against the orders passed by the learned

Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 9725 of 2007 dated 29.11.2007. The learned Single

Judge has rejected the writ petition and that is how the petitioner in the writ petition

is before us in this writ appeal.

2. The first respondent in the appeal is the contesting respondent.

It is that respondent, who has purchased the property in public auction held by the

Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal.

3. May be, after a little persuasion from us, the appellants and the

first respondent have agreed to settle the lis between themselves and have come

to some sort of understanding and the same is reflected in the statement of

undertaking filed by them before this Court. The same is as under:

“The above appeal filed against the judgment of the

learned Single Judge in the writ petition challenging

Exts.P5, P9 and P10 orders have now been settled

between the appellants and the 1st respondent in the

following manner:

The entire claim and dispute arising in the

proceedings before the DRT, Ernakulam between the

appellants and the first respondent auction purchaser

would stand settled. It is agreed that the first respondent,

Anugraha Charitable Trust, the auction purchaser, would

execute a gift deed to convey the property having an

W.A.492/2008. 2

extent of 2.33 cents in Sy.No.323/3 t Mattancherry Village

with the building standing thereon and execute sale deed

to convey the property having an extent of 3.782 cents with

building therein in the same survey No.323/3 of

Mattancherry Village to a nominee as suggested by the

appellants within a period of three months from today, on

the appellants paying a sum of Rs.7.50 lakhs (Rupees

seven lakhs and fifty thousand only). It is agreed by the

appellants that the stamp duty incurred for the above shall

be borne by them. It is also agreed that the vacant

possession of other property having an extent of 23.25

cents of land in Survey No.300/1 at Mattancherry Village,

with the building thereon with all the amenities attached to

the building including electricity and water connection,

which is now occupied by the appellants, will be handed

over to the auction purchaser, the first respondent after

clearing all statutory liabilities, due if any over the property,

within three months from today. The appellants withdraw

all their claims over the land having an extent of 23.25

cents in Sy.No.300/1 with the building. This undertaking

being self working, in the event of non-compliance of the

terms herein agreed to, the first respondent will be at

liberty to move the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam for

getting physical vacant possession of the entire property

involved in this case. It is therefore humbly submitted that

the above writ appeal may be closed recording this

undertaking and appropriate orders be passed.”

4. Placing on record the statement of undertaking filed by the

appellants as well as the first respondent, we dispose of this writ appeal without

going into the merits or demerits of the writ appeal.

5. Before parting with the case, we place on record our deep

appreciation for the concern, the kindness and the good gesture shown by the

W.A.492/2008. 3

respondent Charitable Trust and their learned counsel to save a family who were

thrown out from their only shelter.

Ordered accordingly.

H.L. DATTU,
CHIEF JUSTICE

K.M. JOSEPH,
JUDGE

sb/DK.