IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2009 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1931 RP.No. 1380 of 2008(J) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.26137/2008 DATED 30/09/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WPC: ------------------------------------------------------------- T.T. ANIRUDHAN, S/O. THANKAPPAN THOTTIPUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE,PADINJARE KODIKKULAM POST, THODUPUZHA TALUK. BY ADV. MR.P.KURUVILLA JACOB RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WPC: ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, THE THODUPUZHA PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.NO.4388 AT THODUPUZHA. 2. THE SECRETARY, THE THODUPUZHA PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.NO.4388 AT THODUPUZHA. 3. THE THODUPUZHA PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.NO. 4388 AT THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 4. SINDHU, W/O.K.G.BIJU, NIRATHEL HOUSE PERUMBALLOOR KARA, ARAKUZHA POST, MUVATTUPUZHA. 5. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PYNAVU POST. R1 & R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R. DEEPA R2 & R3 BY ADV. MR.P.V. BABY THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P.1380/2008 & WP(C).26137/2008-J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2009. JUDGMENT 1.The review petitioner purchased an item of property in an auction conducted by the first respondent to recoup debt due from the husband of the fourth respondent to the third respondent. Alleging that the bank is not executing appropriate documents in his favour, the petitioner filed WP(C).26137/2008. When that matter came up for consideration on 30.9.2008, it was shown that the fourth respondent Sindhu had obtained an order of attachment over the property of her husband Biju, who is the debtor to the bank. This Court, therefore, closed WP(C). 26137/2008, having regard to the fact that the creditor bank had filed a writ petition before this Court challenging the decision of the Family Court ordering attachment. The Division Bench, by RP1380/08 & WP(C)26137/08WP(C) -: 2 :- judgment dated 10.11.2008, dismissed that writ petition, namely, WP(C).26064 of 2006 taking the view that the order of the Family Court, which was challenged by the bank, did not amount to creation of any charge. The review petition in hand is filed on the basis of such completion of proceedings in WP(C).26064 of 2006. 2.It is also a matter of record that the Family Court issued order on 29.6.2005 in O.P.1306/2004 passing an order ex parte the husband in favour of the wife. 3.Having regard to the decision of the Division Bench in WP(C).26064/2006, it is clear that the fourth respondent herein did not obtain any order creating a charge in her favour in terms of the order passed by the Family Court. Obviously, therefore, as of now, nothing stands in the way of the bank executing appropriate documents in favour of the petitioner. RP1380/08 & WP(C)26137/08WP(C) -: 3 :- For the aforesaid reasons, in exercise of authority under Article 226 of the Constitution, the review petition is allowed vacating the judgment dated 30th September, 2008 in WP(C). 26137/2008. The said writ petition is hereby treated as re-posted and heard and is accordingly disposed of directing that respondents 1 to 3 shall ensure that all necessary documents on the basis of the concluded sale in favour of the petitioner shall be executed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. R.P.1380 of 2008 and WP(C).26137 of 2008 stand disposed of accordingly. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/230509