IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2011 / 11TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18912 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, S/O.NARAYANAN PILLAI, AGED 54 YEARS, OURAMKUZHI, KATTUMPURAM P.O., KALLARA, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.M.ZIYAD RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), KERALA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MATHRUBHUMI JUNCTION, TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT, KERALA STATE. 2. SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, KILIMANOOR CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK, KILIMANOOR, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. 3. KILIMANOOR CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK, KILIMANOOR, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.M.MANOJ SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN, SC FOR R3 SRI.SAIJO HASSAN FOR R3 SRI.A.S.SABU FOR R3 SRI.RAFEEK. V.K. FOR R3 SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI FOR R3 SRI.PAUL ANTONY MANIAMKOT FOR R3 SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.18912/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. COPY OF THE ADVERTISEMENT OF PUBLIC AUCTION PUBLISHED IN THE MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 1.6.2009 EXT.P2. COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.5.2010 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P3. COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 3.11.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P4. COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 18912 OF 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ext.P2 order passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General) Thiruvananthapuram cancelling the sale held by the second respondent on 25.7.2009 is under challenge in this writ petition. The petitioner was the successful bidder in the sale held on 25.7.2009. Ext.P2 order states that before the security furnished by the debtor late Manirajan was brought to sale, the upset price was not determined after valuing the property and that though the sale notice issued by the sale officer to the debtor was returned with the endorsement that he is no more, the sale officer did not issue notice to the legal heirs of the debtor and therefore, the sale is liable to be set aside. The petitioner challenges Ext.P2 mainly on the ground that it was passed without notice to him and behind his back. It is stated that he had deposited the entire sale amount and therefore he was entitled to be put on notice and heard before Ext.P2 order was issued. The petitioner relies on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Captain v. District Collector (1999 (2) KLT 547) and the decision of a learned single Judge of this Court in Ratheesh v. District Collector (1998 (2) KLT 594) in support of the said contention. 2. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the debtor passed away on 25.4.2009 but WPC No.18912/2010 2 he did not leave behind any legal heirs and therefore failure to issue notice to the legal heirs does not vitiate the sale. The fact however remains that before the property was brought to sale, it has not been valued and the upset price had not been fixed. Further it is for the creditor bank and its officers to enquire and ascertain whether the debtor had left behind legal heirs. If the deceased debtor had left behind legal heirs, his estate will devolved on them. Necessarily therefore the legal heirs will have to be put on notice before the property is sold. They can also avert the sale by paying the amount due to the creditor bank. In such circumstances, I am satisfied that mere failure to issue notice to the petitioner does not vitiate Ext.P2 for the reason that even if notice had been issued to the petitioner no conclusion other than the one arrived at in Ext.P2 would have been possible. I accordingly find no grounds to grant the relief prayed for by the petitioner. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. The respondents shall forthwith refund to the petitioner the money deposited by him. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.18912/2010 3 WPC No.18912/2010 4