IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2009 / 5TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 24659 of 2009(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- POKKI,AGED 55 YEARS,W/O.NANU, MADACKAL HOUSE,POST CHERUMUGHATH,VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI MS.C.G.PREETHA MS.RANI DIOTHIMA P RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KOZHIKODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,NADAPURAM BRANCH, POST KALLACHI,KOZHIKODE-673506. 2. THE SALE OFFICER,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,NO.1635,KALLAI ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673002. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,KOZHIKODE. MR.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, SC FOR THE BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.24659 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 27th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T Heard both sides. 2. The petitioner is a defaulter to the 1st respondent Bank. The Bank has obtained Ext.P4 award in ARC NO.258/2006 against the petitioner. To recover the dues, the Bank initiated sale proceedings as per Ext.P3, which shows that as on 31/03/2009 the liability of the petitioner was Rs.1,03,321/- together with other charges. As per Ext.P3, though sale was scheduled to 26/08/2009, it is now informed by the learned standing counsel that the auction had to be postponed. 3. Although, the petitioner has raised several contentions against the alleged illegality of the sale proceedings, having regard to the fact that the award against the petitioner has become final, I see no substance in any of these contentions. 4. Although, the learned counsel for the petitioner raised a contention that Ext.P4 was an exparte award, and therefore, is liable WP(C) No.24659/2009 -2- to be set aside, having regard to the statement in the award itself, that the petitioner was declared exparte as he had chosen to remain absent inspite of service of summons, I do not find any substance in this contention also. 5. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays for an instalment facility to discharge the liability and I heard the learned counsel for the 1st respondent in this regard. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent objected to the request, pointing out the defaults that were committed by the petitioner. 6. True, the Bank cannot be faulted for the action, which it has taken. But, however, having regard to the fact that the petitioner wants to discharge the liability and to save the property from a distress sale, I am inclined to think that he could be given yet another opportunity to salvage his property. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing that within two weeks from today, the petitioner shall deposit 1/4th of the amount due in terms of Ext.P4, and on that condition, the sale, which is already adjourned, shall be deferred. It is directed that if the petitioner pays the amount as above, he will be permitted WP(C) No.24659/2009 -3- to pay the balance amount in six equal monthly instalments. The first instalment shall be paid on or before 15/10/2009, and the subsequent instalments shall be paid on or before 15th day of every succeeding month. It is made clear that in case default is committed in paying any one of the instalments as above, the Bank will be free to continued the proceedings. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg