IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2008 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15228 of 2008(K) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED / / IN EP. 39 /2002 IN OS.188/1993 of ADDL.SUB COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ DOMINIC, S/O.WASTINE KALATHIL VEEDU, OMANAPUZHA WARD, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, ALAPPUZHA REP. BY ITS MANAGER. 2. MUHAMMED SADIC, S/O.HOWDER, AREEPURATHU HOUSE, KAKKAZHAM MURI, AMBALAPUZHA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15228 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd May, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the judgment debtor in O.S.No.188/1993, on the file of Sub Court, Alappuzha. In execution of the decree, his property was sold in court auction on 22.9.2006. Though petitioner filed E.A.No.478/2006, an application to set aside the sale, it was dismissed. Later, E.A.No.258/2007 was filed to review that order. That was also dismissed under Ext.P5 order. Ext.P5 order is challenged in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that he is prepared to settle the dispute with the respondents and Sub Court, Alappuzha, may be directed to grant an opportunity to him to settle the dispute. After dismissal of the application filed under Order XXI Rule 90 of Code of Civil Procedure, the sale was confirmed. In such circumstances, petitioner cannot settle the dispute with the first respondent Bank alone, as second W.P.(C) No.15228/2008 2 respondent is the successor auction purchaser and sale has become absolute. I do not find any illegality or irregularity in Ext.P5 order warranting interference. Petition is accordingly dismissed. Petitioner is at liberty to settle the dispute with respondents. He is also at liberty to file an appeal challenging the dismissal of the application filed to set aside the sale. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.