IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2009 / 22ND ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 72 of 2009(H) ----------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- THANKAPPAN, S/O.NARAYANAN 60 YEARS, THANIKUZHIYIL HOUSE, KENICHIRA PO., PULPALLY ROAD, SULTHAN BETHERY TALUK, WAYANAD. BY ADV. MR. ALIAS M.CHERIAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. AUTHORISED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, CIRCLE OFFICE, SHATHABDI BHAVAN, GOVINDAPURAM, MINI BYE-PASS ROAD, KOZHIKODE. 2. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK SULTHAN BETHERY BRANCH, SULTHAN BETHERY WAYANAD DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 3. P.M.SUDHAKARAN, 55 YEARS, S/O.MADHAVAN POOTHADI VILLAGE, KENICHIRA PO. SULTHAN BETHERY TALUK WAYANAD ADV. MR. M.P.ASHOK KUMAR FOR R3 MR. P.C.GOPINATH FOR R3 MR. K.P.SUDHEER FOR R2 MS. N.N.PRASEEDA FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 72 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 13th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the proceedings taken by the second respondent under the SARFAESI Act, involving the property of nearly 20 cents purchased by the petitioner from the 3rd respondent. The case of the petitioner is that, it was without any idea as to the subsisting liability towards the second respondent Bank that the petitioner happened to purchase the property from the said respondent. It is also revealed to the petitioner that the property had already been subjected to the equitable mortgage by depositing title deeds with the respondent Bank. The counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is only a bona fide purchaser and that his right and interest as contemplated under the Transfer of Properties Act, are liable to be protected. 2. The respondent Bank has already filed a counter affidavit pointing out the sequence of events asserting the rights and liabilities of the Bank over the property in question. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court, out of the total sum of Rs. 10 lakhs stipulated by the Bank for clearing the entire liability under the loan WP (C) No. 72 of 2009 : 2 : transaction, as part of the OTS benefit extended to the 3rd respondent, the petitioner had remitted a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs and that the petitioner is ready and willing to clear the balance amount as well with further interest and cost from 20.4.2009 (i.e. date of quantification of the liability as aforesaid), subject to the right and interest of the petitioner to claim the amount from the 3rd respondent. The counsel for the 3rd respondent/principal debtor also submits before this Court that, the petitioner can very well claim the due amount from the 3rd respondent after satisfying the loan transaction as above. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to pay 50 % of the entire outstanding liability under the OTS stated as extended to the 3rd respondent with further interest and cost, on or before the 30th of this month and the remaining 50% shall be paid on or before the 30th of August, 2009. On such an event, the loan transaction will be treated as closed and title deeds already in the custody of the respondent Bank will be handed over to the petitioner. This will be without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to proceed against the 3rd respondent for realization of the amount, for which the petitioner was compelled to clear the loan availed by the 3rd respondent. It is also made clear that, the amount already deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the interim order, stated as lying in the no 'lien WP (C) No. 72 of 2009 : 3 : account' can be appropriated by the Bank as part of the amount payable to the Bank. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd