Divya Unnikrishnan vs The Special Sale Officer
2024 Latest Caselaw 9578 Ker

Kerala High Court

Divya Unnikrishnan vs The Special Sale Officer on 4 April, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
  THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1946
                   WP(C) NO. 10209 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

          DIVYA UNNIKRISHNAN
          AGED 41 YEARS, D/O.THANKAMMA,
          RESIDING AT: VALIYAPURAKKAL HOUSE
          (KOLLAYIL), CHEDAMANGALAM, NORTH PARAVUR,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683512
          BY ADVS.
          K.S.SANTHI
          GIBI.C.GEORGE

RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER
          (CHEDAMANGALALN SCB GROUP), OFFICE OF
          THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OF
          CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, SAHAKARANA
          BHAVAN, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULALN
          DISTRICT, PIN - 683512
    2     THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
          SOCIETIES, SAHAKARANA BHAVAN, NORTH
          PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683513
    3     PALLIYAKAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD
          NO.634, PALLIYAKAL, EZHIKKARA P.O, NORTH
          PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683513
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
    4     ADDL.R4
          K.K VARGHESE
          S/O K.A KORUTH, AGED 58 YEARS,
          KANNEZHETH HOUSE, EZHIKKARA P.O,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRCT, PIN - 683513

          (ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
          04.04.2024 IN I.A.NO.2/2024 IN W.P.(C).NO.
          10209/2024]
          BY ADVS.
          M.PAUL VARGHESE
          M.M.MONAYE
 W.P.(C) No.10209 of 2024
                                          :2:


              B.R.MURALEEDHARAN
              ANJANA SUGUNAN(K/003577/2022)
              K.V.SANOSH(K/144/2012)



       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   04.04.2024,           THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.10209 of 2024
                                        :3:




                                     JUDGMENT

The petitioner's property was put to sale and auctioned by

the 3rd respondent Bank on 14.02.2024, and the petitioner

challenges the same. She says that, she is willing to pay off the

entire amount in the loan facility she has availed of from the

respondent Bank and that they had even agreed for a One-

Time-Settlement figure; but that, before she could do so, the

property had been subjected to auction. She, therefore, prays

that the respondent Bank be directed to allow her to pay off the

liability at the One-Time-Settlement figure, so that she can

continue to use the property, since she has no other place to

go, she being in charge of three young children.

2. Sri.M.M.Monayee - learned counsel for the respondent

Bank, however, controverted the afore request made by

Smt.K.S.Santhi on behalf of the petitioner, saying that the

property has already been sold for an amount of

Rs.16,82,090/-, and that it has been purchased in favour of the

4th respondent. He added that the said respondent has paid the

entire sale consideration and, therefore, that the sole

indulgence that can be shown to the petitioner is that she can

be given three months time to pay off the said amount, along

with all applicable charges, along with an escalation of 5% as

per Rule 83 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, if the

auction purchaser is agreeable.

3. Sri.B.R.Muraleedharan - learned counsel appearing for

respondent No.4, submitted that his client is acceptable to the

afore suggestion; however, only if the petitioner pays the

amount not later than three months from now.

Taking note of the afore submissions, and since

Smt.K.S.Santhi also concedes to the above course, I allow this

Writ Petition with the following directions:

(a) I leave liberty to the petitioner to pay the entire

sale consideration remitted by the 4 th respondent, as

also all applicable charges and interest and auction

expenses, along with an additional 5% enhancement,

within a period of three months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(b) If the afore is done, then the sale conducted by

the Bank in favour of the 4 th respondent will be

cancelled - since Sri.M.M.Monayee also concedes

that it has not been confirmed as of now - and the

eligible amounts will be disbursed by the Bank to the

said respondent forthwith thereafter.

Needless to say, if the petitioner defaults payment as

ordered above, the Bank will be at full liberty to confirm the

sale in favour of the 4 th respondent and take further necessary

action as per law, without having to obtain any further orders

from this Court.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE anm

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10209/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 14-02-2024 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL.