High Court Kerala High Court

Abdul Majeed vs The Joint Registrar Of … on 21 May, 2010

Kerala High Court
Abdul Majeed vs The Joint Registrar Of … on 21 May, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 5348 of 2010(P)


1. ABDUL MAJEED, S/O. ABDUL KHADER,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
                       ...       Respondent

2. PAVARATTY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK

                For Petitioner  :SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.N.MOHANAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :21/05/2010

 O R D E R
                  K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
                  -----------------------------------
                 W.P.(C) No.5348 OF 2010
                  -----------------------------------
            Dated this the 21st day of May, 2010

                        J U D G M E N T

~~~~~~~~~~~

The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs.25,000/- from the

2nd respondent Bank after mortgaging an extent of 5 cents of

property, comprised in survey No. 829 of Kandanissery Village,

Thalappilly Taluk, owned by him. However, the petitioner did

not repay the loan amount. Therefore, the Bank filed ARC No.

952/2000 and Ext.P1 award was passed against the petitioner.

Thereafter, the Bank filed E.P.No.148/2001 for execution of the

award. The property of the petitioner was sold in public auction

and was purchased by the Bank.

2. According to the petitioner, he was unable to attend

the proceedings before the Arbitration Court because he was

out of station for several years in connection with his

employment. The petitioner contends that this is the only

property owned by him. Therefore, if the property is not given

back to the petitioner himself and his family would be thrown

W.P.(C) No.5348/2010 2

out on the street. The petitioner has submitted representations

before the respondents expressing his willingness to pay

whatever amounts that may be found payable by him and

requesting them to reconvey his property to him. He prays for

appropriate directions for finally disposing of his

representations.

3. The counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that the

property could be reconveyed to the petitioner but only on

payment of all the amounts that are due to the bank. The

petitioner has no objection to pay whatever amount that may be

found due from him.

3. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is

disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P2

representation of the petitioner, after giving an opportunity of

being heard to both the petitioner as well as the 2nd respondent,

and to pass appropriate orders thereon for reconveying the

property of the petitioner to him, provided he pays all the

amounts that are due and payable by him to the 2nd respondent

W.P.(C) No.5348/2010 3

Bank. Orders as indicated above shall be passed, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two

months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

(K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE)
ps