IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933 WA.No. 168 of 2011 -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.29225/2010 Dated 29/11/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): ADDL.R3 RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------------------- RAJESH.R,S/O.REGUNANADHAN,MOONAM KIAZHAKKETHIL,TKM,CPO,KALLIRODE,KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. R.PRADEEP KUMAR,S/O.LATE K.RAGHUNATHAN, PARTNER,M/S ANJALI COIR MATS AND MATTINGS, POZHIKKARA,PARAVOOR-691301. 2. STATE BANK OF INDIA,KOLLAM BRANCH, KOLLAM,PIN-691506. 3. THE RECOVERY OFFICER,DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL(KERALA & LAKSHADWEEP),ERNAKULAM, PIN-682011. SRI.R.S.KALKURA, SC, SBI SRI.S.SKREEKUMAR FOR R1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.CHELAMESWAR, C.J. & ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============================== W.A. NO. 168 OF 2011 =================== Dated this the 14th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T Antony Dominic, J. 1st respondent had availed of a loan from the 2nd respondent Bank. Default was committed and that was the subject matter of OA No.270/2003 filed by the respondent Bank before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. Pursuant to the recovery certificate issued, Ext.P3 proclamation of sale was issued for sale of the mortgaged property fixing a reserve price of `21,00,000/-. Sale was ultimately conducted on 11/8/2010 and the appellant herein was the successful purchaser for `21,91,710/-. 2. According to him, on the date of sale itself, he deposited 25% of the sale price and the the balance 75% was deposited on 26/8/2010. In the meanwhile, 1st respondent filed WP(C) No.29225/2010 seeking to set aside the sale. By order dated 22/9/2010, this court restrained the 2nd respondent from confirming the auction sale subject to the condition that the 1st respondent shall deposit an amount of `22,00,000/-. It is WA No.168/11 : 2 : conceded by the 2nd respondent that the said order has been complied with. 3. Subsequently, the writ petition itself was disposed of by judgment dated 29th of November, 2010. Taking note of the fact that the full amount due from him has been deposited by the appellant, learned Judge issued the following directions:- 5. Under such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to settle the payments due under recovery certificate, in accordance with the agreement if any arrived, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that the 1st respondent Bank will be at liberty to adjust the amount of Rs.22,00,000/- already deposited, pursuant to the interim order of this Court. The petitioner will also make payment of an additional sum equivalent to interest due on the amount deposited by the 3rd respondent, at the rate of 12%, calculated from the date of deposit onwards till repayment. If the amount is closed as directed above, the 2nd respondent shall return the amount deposited by the 3rd respondent along with interest as mentioned above, without any further delay. 6. It is made clear that, if there is any failure on the part of the petitioner in settling payment of the amount as directed above, it is left open to the 2nd respondent to proceed with further steps for confirmation of the sale. 4. It is aggrieved by the said judgment, the purchaser has WA No.168/11 : 3 : filed this writ appeal. According to the appellant, he having deposited the full sale price, ought not have been deprived of the property, which has been sold in his favour. 5. However, on facts, we notice that by virtue of the orders passed by this Court on 22/9/2010, the liability under the sale certificate and Ext.P3 has since been discharged in full by the 1st respondent, the defaulter. It is also seen from the judgment that taking note of the fact that the appellant made deposit of the amount as claimed by him, the learned Judge has ordered payment of interest at the rate of 12% from the date of deposit till the date the amount deposited by him is refunded by the respondents. Therefore, in our view, the interest of the appellant has been duly taken care of by the learned Single Judge. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the judgment does not call for any interference and is dismissed. Taking note of the submission made by the counsel for the Bank that in view of the pendency of the appeal, `22,00,000/- WA No.168/11 : 4 : deposited by the 1st respondent pursuant to the order dated 22/9/2010 is still kept in a no lien account, we direct that, on the production of a copy of this judgment, it will be open to the Bank to appropriate the said amount towards the amount due under Ext.P3. The Bank shall also refund the amount deposited by the appellant along with interest as directed in the judgment. J.CHELAMESWAR CHIEF JUSTICE. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE. Rp