IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2009 / 14TH ASWINA 1931 FAO.No. 77 of 2008() ---------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28/10/2005 IN EP 5/2001 IN LAR.1/1979 of SUB COURT,THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/JUDGMENT DEBTOR/RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BENNY VARGHESE. RESPONDENT/DECREE HOLDER/CLAIMANT: ---------------------------------------------------------------- THE MALANKARA RUBBER AND PRODUCE CO.LTD MALANKARA BUILDINGS, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. MR.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA, MR.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN. THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: FAO.No. 77 of 2008 ORDER ON I.A. NO.1260/2008 IN FAO NO.77/2008 CLOSED 06/10/2009. SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... F.A.O.NO.77 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the order of the Subordinate Judge, Thodupuzha, who had closed the E.P on the basis that E.A.No.20/2005 and E.A.No.21/2005 had been dismissed and the sale has been confirmed. E.A.No.20/2005 was filed to set aside the sale within the statutory time as contemplated under Order XXI Rule 90 of C.P.C. As the Government did not appear, it was dismissed for default. Thereafter, an application was filed to review that order as E.A.No.21/2005. That also ended in dismissal for the absence of the Government. Since the petition to set aside the sale as well as the review petition were dismissed, the sale was confirmed and the E.P was closed. 2. It is submitted that a substantial amount has been paid or deposited and there was no necessity to sell the Government property that too to the decree holder and therefore, the learned government Pleader would contend that an opportunity be given. : 2 : F.A.O.NO.77 OF 2008 3. Though the prayer in the FAO is not very satisfactory, in the interest of justice, I am inclined to grant an opportunity to the Government thereby setting aside the order passed in E.A.No.20/2005 and E.A.No.21/2005 and also to restore the E.P and direct the executing court to proceed in accordance with law after disposing of E.A.No.20/2005. The court may also have to consider whether the entire amount has been deposited and whether the decree holder has any objection in setting aside the sale if the entire amount is paid. If there is any other E.P connected with this matter is pending, it may be also tried jointly and disposed of. The parties are directed to appear before the Subordinate Judge's Court on 20.11.2009. Disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : F.A.O.NO.77 OF 2008