IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2008 / 22ND SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24471 of 2008(L) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: -------------------- 1. SABITHA.T.P, W/O. MUSHTAFA.K, KEEZHEDATH HOUSE, THAZEPALAM, THIRUR, MALAPPURAM. 2. WAHEEDA.T.P, W/O. AL-AFASAL KHAN, THAYYIL HOUSE, MUNDUR, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI SRI.R.ANIL SRI.ANIL K.MOHAMMED SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. PERINTHALMANNA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK NO.P 534, PERINTHALMANNA.P.O, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), ARBITRATOR, PERINTHALMANNA.P.O, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK. 3. ANWAR SADHAT, S/O. ABOOBEKKER, THOLIRIKKAPALLIYALIL HOUSE, VALIYANGADI, PERINTHALMANNA VILLAGE, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.24471 OF 2008 (L) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned senior Government Pleader for the second respondent, notice to the respondent Nos.1 and 3 is dispensed with, preserving their right to move for review of this judgment, if aggrieved. 2. Petitioners' case is that since they are the sisters of the third respondent, the second respondent issued Ext.P1 award jointly on an item of property, which was offered as mortgage for a loan availed by the third respondent from the first respondent, though they have made certain pleadings to make it appear that the third respondent, apparently, did not have the authority to enter into such transaction. 3. Having perused the materials on record and having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am satisfied that no such W.P.(C) No.24471/2008 - 2 - plea stands. Ext.P1 award has become final by treating the mortgage as one duly created. If the petitioners have any objection to that award, they ought to have carried it before the appropriate forum and are not entitled to object to the execution proceedings on any such grounds. 4. Faced with that situation, the learned counsel for the petitioners confined the submissions to a request that the petitioners may be granted four months' time as a last opportunity to wipe off the entire outstandings. The petitioners have also, through the learned counsel, represented before me that they give up their right, if any, to prosecute Ext.P3 application, before the Arbitrator. This submission is also recorded as an undertaking. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this writ petition is ordered directing that if the petitioners remit an amount of Rs.4 lakhs within a period of two months, the sale shall stand adjourned for a period of four months from now to let the W.P.(C) No.24471/2008 - 3 - petitioners to pay off the entire remaining outstandings, including all accruals within that time frame as a last chance. It is clarified that the time limit fixed above shall be peremptory and in the event of default in remitting any of the instalments as afore- directed, the benefits of this judgment shall stand recalled and the writ petition shall stand dismissed automatically, enabling the respondents to forthwith proceed with further distress action. The petitioners are directed to place a copy of this judgment and the writ petition before the first respondent. Communicate a copy of this judgment to the first respondent. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE skr/13/8 // True copy // P.A. to Judge.