IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1444 of 2008(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.21891/2008 Dated 21/07/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- YATHEENDRAN.S,PRESIDENT, GURUKRIPA HINDU DHARMA PARIPALANA SANGHAM, REG. NO.1884/05, CHIRAYANKIZHU, THIRUVNANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SHRI. K.P. SURESHKUMAR, AGED 52 YEARS, THE SECRETARY, PALODE PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK NO.T.862, PALODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SHRI. B. ANILKUMAR, THE SALE OFFICER, PALODE PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK NO. T.862, PALODE, THIRUVANATHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR R2 BY GOVT. PELADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- Cont. Case (C).No.1444 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT This contempt case is filed with reference to judgment in W.P(C).21891/08. The petitioner herein is the writ petitioner. Reference hereinafter is made on the basis of the status of parties in the writ petition. The third respondent is a primary co-operative bank. It had advanced a loan to one person by name Reghunath. He did not repay. The third respondent, therefore, initiated proceedings under the CARD Bank Act. A portion of the property was sold in auction. The institution represented by the petitioner purchased that item. With that, the provisions of the CARD Bank Act operate and the purchaser gets title. It appears that after the mortgage was created in favour of the third respondent, there was certain criminal proceedings against the debtor Reghunath and the learned Magistrate has issued an order of COC.1444/08 Page numbers attachment as a distress action, by which, the property is under attachment of a criminal court. Obviously therefore, there will be some confusion regarding the registration of the transfer in favour of the petitioner. Under such circumstances, no case of contempt of court comes out, though the third respondent bank has to take effective steps to clear the muddle by moving the competent civil court in relation to the attachment and obtain orders. Without prejudice to that course, this contempt case is closed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.