High Court Kerala High Court

Usha G. Pillai vs State Of Kerala on 12 December, 2007

Kerala High Court
Usha G. Pillai vs State Of Kerala on 12 December, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 36694 of 2007(R)


1. USHA G. PILLAI,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SREE GANAPATHY PILLAI,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. M/S. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION,

3. THE DISTRICT MANAGER,

4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY),

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.M.PREM

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :12/12/2007

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

                = =W.P.(C) = =36694=OF= = = = =
                     = = =No. = =       =
                                           2007 R
                = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

                Dated this the 12th December, 2007

                           J U D G M E N T

Petitioners, against whom proceedings were initiated by the

respondent Corporation, have approached this Court contending

that though the property mortgaged have been sold to a stranger,

they are now willing to pay off the sale value to the Corporation. On

this basis the petitioners pray that the Corporation be directed to

re-convey the property to the petitioners.

2. Standing Counsel for the Corporation submits that in the

sale that was conducted the property was purchased by a stranger

and that the purchaser has already remitted 1/3rd of the bid

amount. In view of the aforesaid facts, I am not prepared to direct

the Corporation to accept the offer made by the petitioners and re-

convey the the property to the petitioners. However, if the

petitioners are so advised they may institute proceedings,

impugning the sale with the buyer also in the party array.

WPC No. 36694/07 – 2-

3. At this stage counsel for the petitioners complains that the

petitioners are unaware of the whereabouts of the bidder and as a

result thereof, they are not in a position to proceed with the bidder

on the party array. In my view the grievance is certainly genuine

and the Corporation will provide the address and other particulars

of the person who has purchased the property in auction.

4. Without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners to impugn

the same or seek appropriate reliefs this writ petition is closed.

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
jan/-