IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 2ND ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 28462 of 2008(L) ------------------------------------- OA.5/2005 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. C.A.RUKHIA, AGED 52, W/O.V.P.MOHAMMED MOULAVI, MUBARAK MANZIL, PERUMPADAPPU P.O. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. C.A.ASMABI, AGED 45, W/O.MOHAMMED ALI, KARAYIL HOUSE, AKALAD P.O., MANNALAMKUNNU, CHAVAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. SRI.P.J.VINOD JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. FEDERAL BANK, MARKET ROAD BRANCH, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY MANAGER. 2. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS, MINISTRY OF FINANCE. ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) NO.28462 OF 2008 (L) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioners were defendant Nos.3 and 5 in O.S.182/1998, which was decreed as per Exhibit P3 on 8-8-2003. They were defendant Nos.3 and 5 in O.A.No.5/2005 allowed by the DRT on 17-5-2005, as per Exhibit P1. I may also notice that the other defendants in the suit including mother and brother of the petitioners, remained ex-parte. When the sale, following the recovery certificate, is listed to 25-9-2008, on 23-9-2008, the petitioners filed interlocutory application before the DRT to set aside the ex-parte recovery order passed on 17-5-2005 by stating that there is connivance between the bank and the first defendant Smt.M.P.Soosy who availed the loan. Exhibit P4 affidavit does not contain any allegation against brother or mother of the petitioners. At this point of time, I do not find any ground to interfere in exercise of authority under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in favour of the petitioners. This writ petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE skr/25/9 // True copy // P.A. to Judge.