IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2009 / 3RD ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17398 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BABU.V.K., S/O.LATE KRISHNAN, AGED 49 YEARS, VADAKKUMPURAM, KAIPAMANGALAM BEECH, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.O.H.NAZEEBA SMT.M.SINDHU THANKAM SMT.S.L.SYLAJA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), THRISSUR. 2. NATIKA (FARKA) HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, R-346, EDAMUTTAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. ARBITRATOR/SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, KERALA STATE HOUSING FEDERATION, OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THRISSUR. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.17398 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner claims to be a fisherman who had availed of a loan of Rs.50,000/- from the respondent bank on 22.2.2001. Default was committed, resulting in an arbitration proceedings against him. Award was passed and the mortgaged property is scheduled to be sold on 26.6.2009. Ext.P2 is the sale proclamation which shows that the sale is for realizing Rs.1,45,643/- and other dues. At that stage, petitioner fled Ext.P3, claiming that the petitioner being a fisherman is entitled to waiver of the liability in terms of the scheme floated by the State Government. Complaint is that Ext.P3 is not considered and at the same time steps are continued for concluding the sale in pursuance to Ext.P2. ] WP(c).No.17398/09 2 2. I heard the Government Pleader also. As already noticed, the claim of the petitioner is for waiver ad that is urged by the Petitioner before the respondent bank itself by filing Ext.P3. Having regard to the pendency of the above representation, I am inclined to think that the petitioner is entitled to have the representation considered. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of as follows; 3. If the petitioner remits Rs.25,000/- before 11.30a.m. on 26.6.2009, though the sale in pursuance to Ext.P2 can go on, the sale shall not be confirmed. Subject to such payment it is also directed that, Ext.P3 representation shall be considered and a decision thereon shall be taken. Confirmation of the sale will be dependent upon the outcome of the decision to be take on Ext.P3. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. vi (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE WP(c).No.17398/09 3 WP(c).No.17398/09 4