IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2009 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 9574 of 2009(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BABY JOHN, W/O.NANGINI JOHN, AMMADAM DESOM, PARALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI SRI.K.R.ARUN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SPECIAL SALES OFFICER, THRISSUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK GROUP, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL0, THRISSUR 680001. 2. THE TRICHUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. HIGH ROAD, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. 3. A.G.RAVINDRANATHAN, 'PRASANTHI', KRISHNA GARDENS, THIRUVAMBADY, THRISSUR. R1, R2 BY ADV.SRI.C.D.DILIP, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.9574 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner is a third party to a contract of lending, under which, the second respondent advanced certain amounts to the third respondent. The second respondent bank has initiated action under the SARFAESI Act. According to the petitioner, even before the mortgage in favour of the bank, the third respondent had executed an agreement for sale in favour of the petitioner. On the strength of that, the petitioner has obtained a decree from the civil court, for specific performance. That decree is now pending in appeal before that court under Section 96 CPC. On query by this Court, it is clearly stated that no sale deed has been executed through the civil court though the entire consideration in terms of the agreement is deposited before the civil court. In the absence of a deed of sale being executed in furtherance of the decree for specific performance, the title to the property does not get transferred from the vendor to the vedee and even on WPC.9574/09 Page numbers execution of such deed, it will not relate back to any date prior to the date of the agreement. 2. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, his client may have certain rights referable to any lien or charge for any return advance which may be part of consideration of the sale. There are a couple of remedies available for the debtor third respondent and there are some judgments, including Exts.P3 and P4 touching the matter. However, I am not going into those issues because the matter in hand, in my view, does not call for interference by the writ court. While the petitioner accuses respondents 2 and 3 of having colluded, learned counsel for the second respondent says that the collusion is between the third respondent and the petitioner. If the petitioner has interest on the property that is being proceeded against, he has adequate remedy for appropriate relief from the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of that Act. Hence, without prejudice to that course, this writ petition is closed, however, directing that on WPC.9574/09 Page numbers appropriate request of the petitioner, the bank will give him the details regarding the total outstandings , for which, action is being taken. 3. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances, copy of any other notice that would be issued to the third respondent by the bank would also be issued to the petitioner in his address as shown in this writ petition. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.27/3.