IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2009 / 7TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No.2760 of 2009(C) -------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN E.P.77/1997 IN OS.52/1985 of II ADDL. SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: --------------- PANSY XAVIER, C/O.L.ANTONY XAVIER D'CRUZ, LEANS LINES, VALIATHURA, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.P.BABU KUMAR RESPONDENT: ---------------- DENA BANK, REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BRANCH. SC. DENA BANK SRI.N.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.2760 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 27th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard the counsel for the petitioner who is judgment debtor No.1 in O.S.52/1985 on the file of the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. His grievance is that it is based on an objection filed by him in 2006 that the court below has fixed the upset price after issuing a commission and getting down Commissioner's Report; that the case stood posted for settlement of proclamation on 10/10/08; that the case was not called on that day; that it was subsequently that the next posting date was fixed and petitioner's counsel did not know about it and therefore, there was no representation on that day and when the matter was taken up, the petitioner/judgment debtor was set ex parte and upset price was fixed at Rs.12,75,000/-; that the upset prise so fixed W. P. C. No.2760 of 2009 -2- on the basis of objection filed by the petitioner to the proclamation schedule in 2006 is very low; that the scheduled property consists of twelve and a half cents of land and a building having a plinth area of 5000 sq. ft. and the property is demarcated with compound wall and is by the side of a prominent road in Thiruvananthapuram Corporation and the fact that sale was ordered after proclaiming the property fixing the upset price at Rs.12,75,000/- was known to him only when the proclamation was affixed on the door of his house and that an opportunity be granted for the petitioner to have Ext.P6 objections filed to the proclamation on 23/01/09 being considered. 2. It is seen that Ext.P6 objection is filed by the petitioner and her husband. Probably the second judgment debtor/husband W. P. C. No.2760 of 2009 -3- keeps back with a view to approach this Court on a subsequent date when the property is brought up for sale. However, inasmuch as it is contended in Ext.P6 objection that the property is worth more than Rs.1 crore and the building is worth more than Rs.20 lakhs, I set aside the proclamation effected and direct the court below to settle the proclamation afresh causing the decree holder to file proclamation showing in a separate column therein the value of the property and building as shown by the judgment debtors specifying that the value so shown is value according to the judgment debtors. The proclamation so caused to be filed shall be approved and the property shall be ordered to be proclaimed and sold so that there will not be any grievance for the petitioner and her husband that the property worth more than Rs.1 crore and 20 lakhs was W. P. C. No.2760 of 2009 -4- sold showing upset price as Rs.12 lakhs and odd and consequently, the property did not fetch the price which it should have fetched had the proclamation been approved and published showing all the relevant details. 3. With this direction, I dispose of this Writ Petition as counsel for decree holder also has entered appearance and allow the decree holder or the judgment debtor to produce a copy of this judgment in the court below forthwith to avoid further delay in the matter of execution and satisfaction of the decree in a suit of 1985 being had. 4. Issue copy of this judgment to the counsel on either side urgently. K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-