IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 30791 of 2008(N) ------------------------------------ OS.197/2001 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ ABDUL KHADER, S/O ISMAIL RAWTHER, AGED 47 YEARS, PAINUMMOOTIL THEKKETH, AATHIKKATTUKULANGARA. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- FEDERAL BANK LTD., CHUNAKKARA BRANCH, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, CHUNAKKARA. BY ADV. SRI. GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL) - R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30791 of 2008(N) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF PLAINT IN O.S. N O. 197/01 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY PETITIONER. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF E.P. NO. 22/08. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF SALE NOTICE DATED 7/10/08. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION IN EP DATED 16.10.07. EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF E.A.NO. 336/08 TO ACCEPT EXT.P5 OBJECTION. EXT.P7 - TRUE COPY OF E.A. NO. 337/08 TO ADVANCE THE CASE. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE rhs K.P. BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------- W.P(c) No. 30791 of 2008 ---------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the first judgment debtor in O.S. No. 197 of 2001 on the file of Sub Court, Mavelikkara. The matter arises from execution. E.P.No.22 of 2008 was filed by the respondent/decree holder for realisation of decree amount by sale of the property hypotheticated to the respondent-bank. It is submitted that the property is now ordered to be proclaimed for sale by fixing the upset price at Rs.3,42,339/- . According to the petitioner the property will fetch more than Rs.20,00,000/- and the land alone would fetch more than Rs.10,00,000/- and that the upset price shown is very meagre. The proclamation schedule is not filed and therefore it cannot be decided as to whether there is any impropriety in describing the property brought to sale. Yet another contention is that the building has been constructed after hypothetication to the Bank investing Rs.10,00,000/- and that is not shown in the proclamation schedule. For non-production of proclamation schedule for sale, it is not clear whether it has been so W.P(c) No. 30791/2008 2 described or not. However, Exhibit P4 sale notice without the proclamation schedule however, shows that the upset price shown is only Rs.3,42,339/-. The prayer in this writ petition is to set aside Exhibit P4 notice and direct the execution court to consider Exhibit P5 objection to the execution petition on merit. I am not of the view that for the said purpose, Exhibit P5 objection has to be ordered to be received by the execution court and to consider it. I have gone through the objection. The objections are that existence of the building is not described in the schedule and that the upset price fixed is low. The respondent/decree holder may describe in the proclamation schedule that there is a building constructed by the judgment debtor which according to him is worth Rs.15,00,000/- as stated in Exhibit P5 and that according to the judgment debtor the price of the property inclusive of building will be Rs.25,00,000/-. The execution court may cause the decree holder to file fresh proclamation schedule incorporating the above details specifying it that those are details and value suggested by the judgment debtor, so as to enable the intending purchasers to be alerted to make enquiry as regards the W.P(c) No. 30791/2008 3 real market value of the property and settle the proclamation on the revised proclamation schedule that may be filed accordingly and thereafter to proclaim the property for sale and to conduct the sale. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. K.P. BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE scm