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. 6398 of 2008(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V. YESODA, W/O. NANU, AGED 60 YEARS, MAVILAKANDY HOUSE, VENDUTTAYI, P.O. PINARAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, THE KADIRUR CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. NO.C-425, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OP. SOCIETIES (GEN), THALASSERY, KANNUR. 2. THE KADIRUR CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.NO.C-425, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O. KADIRUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX Ext.P1. True copy of the relevant pages of the passbook of the petitioner. Ext.P2 True copy of the sale notice dated 3.12.2007 issued by the Ist respondent. Ext.P3. True copy of the receipt dated 14.1.2008. // true copy // P.A to Judge ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.6398 OF 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner is admittedly a defaulter to the 2nd respondent Bank. Proceedings were initiated for recovery of the amount and finally, the bank took steps for sale of the mortgaged property and it was at that stage this writ petition was filed. 2. This court by order dated 28.2.2008 directed the petitioner to remit Rs.15,000/- per month and on that basis coercive action was ordered to be deferred. Admittedly this order has not been complied with and even according to the petitioner all that the petitioner paid is Rs.44,000/-. If that be so, going by the order itself the stay granted by this court stands automatically vacated. 3. However, counsel for the petitioner now points out that despite her non-compliance with the order, Bank has WP(c).No.6398/08 2 not taken any further action in the matter. According to the petitioner in the meanwhile she has taken steps to dispose of her yet another property and propose to raise funds and discharge the liability of the bank Ext.P4 is said to be an agreement for sale that she has entered into with the buyer. Producing Ext.P4 petitioner has filed I.A.No.7498/09, praying that the Bank be directed to give 3 months time for her to raise funds and discharge the liability. 4. I heard the counsel for the respondent Bank and the counsel pointed out the default committed by the petitioner in remitting the dues and also in complying with the interim order passed by this court. 5. True the Bank is justified in the objection that it has raised. However, having regard to the fact that the petitioner is seeking only 3 months time to discharge the liability, I am inclined to think that the petitioner should be given yet another opportunity to save her property. However, the same can only on condition. WP(c).No.6398/08 3 Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing that the sale, if not already conducted, will stand deferred till 30th September,2009 on condition that on the 30th of June, July and August 2009 the petitioner remits Rs.15,000/- each with the Bank. Needless to say that in case default is committed the bank will be free to proceed with the recovery proceedings. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the Ist respondent. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).No.6398/08 4