IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2009 / 8TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 21488 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ AMU ALIAS MANU, S/O. ALAVI, AGED 70 YEARS, KARIMBANACHOLA HOUSE, KARUMANAM KURISSI CHERPALASSERY, PALAKKAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. SECRETARY, OTTAPALAM PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., 2. OFFICE INSPECTOR/SPECIAL SALE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, OTTAPPALAM PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., NO. P. 621, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DIST. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 21488 OF 2009 (E) ===================== Dated this the 30th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P2, an auction notice published by the Sale Officer on 15/6/09 proposing to auction the property of the petitioner on 31/7/09 for realising Rs.4,73,982/- along with other charges. The contention raised by the petitioner is that he had availed of a loan of only Rs.70,000/- and that since the amount shown in Ext.P2 was exorbitant, he sought clarification and that the same has not been given. It is his complaint that despite the above, the Bank is proceeding with the auction. 2. Ext.P1 is the complaint that is stated to have been made by the petitioner and Ext.P3 is the reply. A reading of Ext.P3 shows that on 15th of February, 1999, petitioner had applied for a loan of Rs.2 lakhs. The loan was sanctioned and he executed all necessary documents. Thereafter, in instalments, he received payment of Rs.1,70,000/- and no repayment has been made till date. 3. In so far as his dispute about the principal amount that WPC 21488/09 :2 : is received is concerned, in Ext.P3 it is stated that in the petitioner's own letter dated 21/3/2006, he has admitted of having received Rs.1,70,000/-. It is stated that Rs.1,70,000/- is repayable with interest at 15.5% and that over the years, the amount has accumulated and what is shown in Ext.P2 is the amount that is now due. 4. In view of this, I do not find any merit in the contentions that are now raised by the petitioner. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp