IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1932 OP(C).No. 794 of 2010(O) ------------------------ OS.199/1991 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONERS: -------------------- 1. JANAMMA THOMAS, W/O.DECEASED THOMAS MATHEW, MUTHOOT HOUSE, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANMTHITTA DT. PIN-689 641 2.THOMAS JOHN, B/O.DECEASED THOMAS MATHEW, MUTHOOT BANKERS, PUNNEN ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3.THOMAS GEORGE, B/O.DECEASED THOMAS MATHEW, MUTHOOT BANKERS, PUNNEN ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4.THOMAS MUTHOOT,B/O.DECEASED THOMAS MATHEW, MUTHOOT BANKERS, PUNNEN ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.SYAM KUMAR SMT.ROSY GEORGE SMT.KRIPA ELIZABETH MATHEWS SRI.V.N.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SRI.GEORGE THOMAS, S/O.M.GEORGE, MUTHOOT HOUSE, KOZHENCHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA DT, PIN-689 641 2. SRI.GEORGE JACAOB, MUTHOOT HOUSE, KOZHENCHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA DT, PIN-689 641 3. SMT.SARAMMA JACOB, H.NO.48/2279, PALLATHY, JAI VILLA, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-25 4. SMT.SYLU JACOB, MUTHOOT HOUSE, KOZHENCHERY, C/O.JACOB NIVAS, SUPERINTENDENT, MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE, HINDUSTHAN NEWS PRINT LTD, NEWS PRINT NAGAR, VELLOOR, KOTTAYAM DT. 5. SMT.NISSY MATHEW, W/O.ROY MATHEW, MUTHOOT HOUSE, KOZHENCHERY , PATHANAMTHITTA DT. PIN-689 641 6. MRS.SOSAMMA MATHEW, W/O.LATE M.MATHEW, MUTHOOT HOUSE, KOZHENCHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA DT. PIN-689 641 7. ROY M.MATHEW, S/O.LATE M.MATHEW, MUTHOOT HOUSE, KOZHENCHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA DT., PIN-689 641 8. SMT.SHIRLY MATHEW, D/O.M.MATHEW, MUTHOOT HOUSE, KOZHENCHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA DT., PIN-689 641 THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P.(Civil) No.794 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of November 2010 J U D G M E N T Defendants 2 to 7 in a suit for partition have filed this original petition challenging Ext.P2 order passed by the learned Sub Judge, Ernakulam directing for sale of the property by public auction. From the submissions made and perusal of the materials tendered with the original petition, it is seen there are two items of properties, one having an extent of 7.167 cents and the other of 8.612 cents. The former comprised of buildings and the latter only of land. Preliminary decree passed in the suit provided 2/6 shares to the plaintiffs, and the rest to the defendants. In the final decree proceedings partition among the sharers in accordance with their shares being found impracticable, the court proceeded for sale of the suit properties by auction among the sharers. Two among the defendants, who participated in the auction, knocked down the O.P.(Civil) No.794 of 2010 -: 2 :- bid for a sum of Rs.2 Crores. However, as they failed to deposit 25% of the bid amount, sale could not be completed. Thereafter, considering an application moved by the plaintiffs and hearing the parties, the learned Sub Judge passed Ext.P2 order directing for steps to conduct public auction, for sale of the property. That order is challenged in this Original Petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. I heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 3. Auction of the properties should be limited among the sharers only, and the court below was not justified in proceeding with for sale by public auction is the submission of the learned counsel. Perusing Ext.P1 Application moved by the plaintiffs, which narrates in detail what transpired when the court ordered for sale by auction among the sharers, I find no impropriety or illegality in the order passed by the court below directing for sale of the properties by public auction. Previously when auction was held among the sharers, some of the defendants bidding for a sum of Rs.2 Crores knocked down the sale. Plaintiffs who O.P.(Civil) No.794 of 2010 -: 3 :- participated in the auction raised the bid up to a sum of Rs.1.95 Crores, as seen from the affidavit filed by the 4th plaintiff in support of Ext.P1 application. The properties are encumbered to the extent of Rs.1.60 Crores, as admitted to under a statement filed by the defendants. When such be the position, with previous auction of the properties among the sharers had failed, there is no impropriety in the direction issued by the court below to proceed with the sale by public auction. From the submissions made, it is also noticed that publications have been effected for sale by public auction and it is fixed on 20.12.2010. In such circumstances, no interference with the order already passed by the learned Sub Judge is called for, and the Original Petition is dismissed. Hand over. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. Jvt