IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2011 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1933 OP(C).No. 563 of 2011(O) --------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED10/08/2010 IN EA 476,477,478/2010 IN OS.152/1997 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- MATHEWS JACOB, S/O.JACOB MATHEW, AGED 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT PONMALAI PLANTATIONS, DHONI POST, AKATHETHARA VILLAGE, PALAKKAD. BY ADVS. SMT.A.G.ANEETHA SMT.M.KABANI DINESH RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. BRANCH MANAGER, THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD., OLAVAKKODE BRANCH, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD, PIN-678 002. 2. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI, PIN-110 001. ADVS. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI FOR R2 SRI.K.ANAND (A.201) FOR R1 SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN FOR R1 SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R2 THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SMT K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ O.P(C).No.563 OF 2011 ------------------------------ Dated this the 8 th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT O.S.No.152 of 1997 Sub Court, Palakkad filed by the first respondent bank against the petitioner was decreed for realisation of a sum of Rs.1,41,069/-. In execution as E.P.No.72 of 1999, an item of immovable property belonging to the petitioner was brought to sale and the property was purchased by the decree holder himself. The sale was confirmed and sale certificate was issued to the first respondent on 16.10.2000. 2. The petitioner filed E.A.No.339 of 2001 to set aside the sale. There was a delay of 3537 days in filing that application and therefore, an application for condonation of delay was also filed as E.A.332 of 2010. E.A.No.333 of 2010 was filed by the petitioner under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for time to deposit the O.P(C).No.563 OF 2011 2 decree amount. All the aforesaid three applications were dismissed by the Executing Court holding that the Executing Court has no power to condone the delay in filing the application to set aside the court auction sale. Thereafter, the petitioner filed E.A.No.476 of 2010 to set aside the sale. That application was dismissed, as per Ext.P8 order dated 10 th August, 2010, which is under challenge in this Original Petition. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is prepared to pay the entire decree amount together with compound interest at 16.25% and costs to the first respondent decree holder within three months. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent bank, on instructions, submitted that if the petitioner complies with the aforesaid O.P(C).No.563 OF 2011 3 offer, the bank is prepared to assign the immovable property to the petitioner at the expense of the petitioner. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent are recorded and the Original Petition is disposed of as above. It is submitted by the counsel appearing for both parties that they will comply with their respective obligations without fail. The learned counsel for the first respondent Bank submitted that till the expiry of three months, the property will not be transferred by the Bank to others. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is making attempts to persuade the first respondent to reduce the interest.He is free to do so.If a consensus on O.P(C).No.563 OF 2011 4 that point emerges, nothing stated herein above would stand in the way of the parties to implement the same. Original Petition is disposed of as above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms