IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2008 / 8TH MAGHA 1929 WA.No. 1122 of 2005 --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.9162/1995 Dated 09/06/2004 .................... APPELLANT/7TH RESPONDENT IN OP: ------------------------------------------------------- B.KRISHNAN NAIR, SREECHITHRA, VATTAKARIKAKOM, PANTHALACODE, P.O. (VIA) VATTAPPARA, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI SRI.RAHUL VENUGOPAL SMT.S.SIBHA RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 6: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. G.VISWANATHAN, EDATHARAPOIKAIL VEEDU, PANTHALACODE P.O. VIA.VATTAPPARA, TRIVANDRUM. 2. G.DILIJA, DO. DO. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, TRIVANDRUM. 5. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OEPRATIVE SOCIETIES, VANCHIYOOR, TRIVANDRUM. 6. TRIANDRUM CO-OEPRATIVE AGRICULTUAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., THYCAUD, TRIVANDRUM T.170, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 7. THE SPECIAL SALES OFFICER, TRIVANDRUM CO-OEPRATIVE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. NO.T.70, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. - 2 - WA.No. 1122 of 2005 8. M.GANGADHARAN NAIR, S/O.MATHAVAN PILLAI, HINDU, AGED 62, RESIDING AT THANNOORKKONATHU, MELULLAZHTHURA VEEDU, PANTHALACODE P.O. VATTAPPARA P.O. TRIVANDRUM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.RAMASWAMY SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE R3 TO R5 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA R6 BY ADV. SRI.D.KISHORE R8 BY ADV. SRI. L.MOHANAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.A.No.1122 of 2005-C ------------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 28th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. The 7th respondent in the writ petition is the appellant in this writ appeal. He calls in question the correctness or otherwise of the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in O.P.No.9162/95 dated 9th June, 2004. (2). The 7th respondent has purchased 15 cents of land in Sy.No.274/194/2 situated in Uliyunthura Village belonging to the 6th respondent in a public auction held by the respondent Bank on 3-2-1994. The Bank has executed a sale deed in favour of the appellant/7th respondent. The sale so made is also confirmed by the competent authority. The writ petitioners had called in question the action of the Revenue Recovery Officer in bringing to sale 15 cents of land in Sy.No.294/194/2 which was purchased by them in the year 1990. The learned Single Judge, after detailed discussion had allowed the original petition and had set aside the sale that was made in favour of the appellant/7th respondent. That is how the 7th respondent is before this Court in this writ appeal. (3). The learned counsel appearing for the parties to the lis had argued the matter in length. We had suggested them to enter into some sort of compromise to bring an end to the litigation. The suggestion so made by us is accepted by both the learned counsel. W.A.No.1122/2005 -2- (4). The parties to the lis has filed appropriate memos/affidavits before this Court. (5). In the memo it is stated that appellant/7th respondent is prepared to accept a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rupees one lakh twenty thousand only) in full and final settlement of all his claims and in consideration of the same, the sale may be set aside. (6). The original petitioners have also accepted the suggestion made by this Court and is prepared to part with Rs.1,20,000/-. The first petitioner has also produced a Demand Draft before us today. The Demand Draft that is produced by the first petitioner/contesting respondent in this appeal is accepted by the learned counsel Sri.B.Krishnamani. (7). In view of the amicable settlement between the parties to the lis, the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in O.P.No.9162/95 is set aside. The sale that was effected in favour of the appellant/7th respondent by the respondent dated 3-2-1994 is set aside. (8). In view of the compromise that has been entered into between the parties, the sale deed executed by the Bank in favour of the 7th respondent is also cancelled. On presentation of a copy of this order before the Sub Registrar, the Sub Registrar will make appropriate entries in respect of the properties in the records maintained by him. (9). The respondent Bank is directed to refund whatever amount payable to the petitioners, within one month from today. The appellant shall handover the original documents handed over by the Bank to W.A.No.1122/2005 -3- him to the petitioners in the writ petition within 4 week's time from today. The order passed by us shall not be treated as a precedent in any other case. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE MS