IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2009 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 9829 of 2007(T) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. SIVANANDAN, T.C.16/784, JAGATHY, THYCAUD, TRIVANDRUM. 2. MOHAN, T.C.16/782, JAGATHY, THYCAUD, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. MR.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. RECOVERY OFFICER, OFFICE OF DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. 2. MANAGER, CANARA BANK, CANTONEMENT BRANCH, TRIVANDRUM. 3. M.M.SUBRAMANYAN, M/S. MANICKAM PILLAI, T.C.2424/606, LINE ROAD, THYCAUD, TRIVANDRUM. 4. RAMASWAMY, MANICKAM PILLAI GARDENS, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.N. SUDHA DEVI. R2 BY ADV. MR.P. GOPINATHAN MENON, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 9829/2007-T APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT BY THE BANK BEFORE THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL DATED 13/06/2002. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND NO.573/CB/TVM. DATED 29/08/2002. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT BEFORE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL DATED 08/03/2007. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE PROCLAMATION OF SALE CAME IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 13/02/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 9829 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 11th June, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are guarantors for repayment of loan amounts taken by respondents 3 and 4 from the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent initiated proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal for recovery of the amounts due from respondents 3 and 4. A decree was passed in favour of the Bank, pursuant to which the 1st respondent Recovery Officer of the Tribunal initiated proceedings for sale of the property belonging to the petitioners. The petitioners challenge that sale on the ground that no proceedings have been initiated against the properties of respondents 3 and 4 for recovery before proceeding against the properties belonging to the petitioners. The petitioners therefore seek the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the originals relating to Ext. P4 and quash the same; (ii) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to proceed with sale of 19 ½ cents in R.S.2297/Thycaud village and 10 cents of land in R.S.2387/2-4 and R.S.2388/3-2 of Thycaud village and 15 cents of land in T.C.16/782 before proceeding with the petitioners' property.” 2. The petitioners could not obtain a stay in this writ petition. This Court only directed that sale, if any, would be subject to the result of the writ petition. If the sale has taken place, the remedy of the petitioners lies in proceeding against respondents 3 and 4 for recovery of the amounts realised from the petitioners by sale of their properties. By the sale third parties have become entitled to right over the properties and they are not before me. Therefore, I cannot now pass orders, which would affect their legally obtained rights. The petitioners have also not been able to satisfy this Court that the sale is W.P.C. No. 9829/07. -: 2 :- vitiated by any irregularities. That being so, I am not inclined to go into the question as to whether the 1st respondent should first proceed against respondents 3 and 4 or the petitioners in so far as the liability is joint and several. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to seek appropriate reliefs against respondents 3 and 4 in appropriate proceedings , this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/