IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT:- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST MAY 2008 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1930 W.A.No.874 of 2008 --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.1679/2008 DATED 17/03/2008 .................... APPELLANTS: PETITIONERS:- ------------------------------------------- 1. K.C.THOMAS, S/O.CHACKO, AGED 57, CHAVARA HOUSE, OLD DESAM ROAD, THOTTAKATTUKARA, ALUVA. 2. C.V. CHACKO, S/O.C.C. VARKEY, AGED 66, CHERUKULAM HOUSE, NEDUMKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS:- ------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MAIN BRANCH RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 2. RECOVERY OFFICER, D.R.T., 8TH FLOOR, K.S.H.B. BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM. 3. SMT.B.SATHY, W/O.SRI.R.SIVASANKARA KURUP,) (AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE APPELLANTS “DASARATHAM”, DESAM P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DIST. R1 BY ADV.SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI. R3 BY ADV.SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SRI.RAM PRASAD UNNI. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:- H.L.Dattu,C.J. & M.C.Hari Rani,J. ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No.874 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 21st day of May, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu,C.J. This Writ Appeal is directed against the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C).No.1679 of 2008 dated 17th March, 2008. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has rejected the writ petition, however, has reserved liberty to the petitioners to make an appropriate application, if they so desire, for setting aside the sale by the competent authority, if the same is permissible in accordance with law. 2. The facts are not in dispute. The 1st appellant had borrowed certain funds from the 1st respondent-Bank and had failed to pay the amounts so borrowed within the stipulated time. In order to recover the amount borrowed, the Bank had initiated appropriate proceedings. At the first instance, the appellants had approached the Bank for granting them some instalment facilities to pay up the amounts due to the Bank. In fact, the Bank had acceded to the request made by the appellants. Thereafter since the appellants failed to adhere to the promise made by them, the Bank had initiated appropriate revenue recovery proceedings. The Sale Officer has auctioned the property. The 3rd respondent has purchased the property in the public auction held by the Sale Officer/Recovery Officer. In fact, the Sale Certificate is also given to the 3rd respondent. It is at that stage, the appellants/petitioners had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C).No.1679 of 2008. 3. The learned Single Judge, after tracing the history of the case and being of the opinion that the petitioners are not entitled to the discretionary reliefs at the hands of this Court, has rejected the writ petition. W.A.No.874 of 2008 - 2 - We do not find any ground to interfere with the reasoning and conclusion reached by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, we do not think that it is a fit case to entertain this Writ Appeal. Therefore, while confirming the orders passed by the learned Single Judge, we reject the Writ Appeal. Ordered accordingly. H.L.Dattu Chief Justice M.C.Hari Rani Judge vku/-