IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 6014 of 2008(N) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- A.GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.AYYAPPAN, AYKKARAKUNNEL HOUSE, VANNAPPURAM P.O., THODUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KAPPILLIL ANILKUMAR. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- SIVARAMAN, S/O.NARAYANAN, NADACKANAL HOUSE, VADAKKUMMURI, THODUPUZHA VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. JOSE JOSEPH ARAYAKUNNEL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/02/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 6014 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 21st day of February, 2008. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is preferred with a prayer to set aside Ext.P4, P7, P8, P9, P10 and P12. At the out set I may like to hold that the judgment debtor is attempting to raise all technical possible objections that he is legally entitled with the object of protracting the enjoyment of the usufructs of the decree by the decree holder in a suit which is filed in the year 1996. But I am fully conscious of the fact that when a sale is to be conducted by a civil Court it has to meticulously follow the procedural formalities contemplated and further the decision of the Apex Court as well as this Court makes it very clear that when a property is to be sold the object must be to get the maximum price for the property so that a valid right which the judgment debtor looses shall not be jeopardized by hasty action. The decree holder suggests market value of the property at Rs.50,000/- and according to W.P.C 6014 OF 2008 -:2:- the Court below the judgment debtor's suggestion is Rs.50 lakhs. The Court fixed the upset price at 5 lakhs. When there is an ocean of difference between the value suggested by the parties and when the Court takes the responsibility of fixing the upset price it shall be done on the basis of the materials and there must be proper reasonings for the same. Unfortunately it is not seen. In a case where the property is encumbered with lot of liabilities it may affect the price of the property but these are all matters which the Court can take into consideration while fixing the upset price. Therefore I feel interference is necessary and so I direct the Court below to defer the sale which is posted on 10.3.2008 and direct the said Court to conduct a fresh enquiry regarding the upset price to be fixed for the property. After permitting both sides to adduce evidence, if any, and on hearing them the Court may fix the upset price and at the same time also can show the values suggested by the decree holder as well as the judgment debtor. The Court is also bound to incorporate the available liabilities on the property to put the auction W.P.C 6014 OF 2008 -:3:- purchaser in knowledge of the liability attached to the property. Let these be done within a period of two weeks from today and the draft sale finalized and the property to be sold at any rate before the Court closes for summer holidays. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-