IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 12TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 21ST KARTHIKA 1932 OP(C).No. 685 of 2010(O) ------------------------ OS.1504/2008 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER ------------------------------ N.V.JOSE, S/O. VARGHESE, AGED 56 YEARS, TRICHUR TALUK, VIYYUR TALUK-609010. BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) RESPONDENT: --------------- VISHRUTHA KURIES & LOANS LTD., TRICHUR TALUK, VIYYUR TALUK - 609 019. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).No.685 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 12th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Judgment debtor in E.P.No.1303 of 2009 in O.S.No.1504 of 2008 of the court of learned Principal Munsiff, Thrissur is the petitioner before me challenging Ext.P2, sale notice. According to the petitioner for the sum of `.69,450/- and interest due from him his property worth more than `.Sixty Lakhs is scheduled to be sold in public auction on 22-11-2010. Learned counsel contends that the property involved is 12.5 cents with a residential building situated in Thrissur town which will fetch more than `.Sixty Lakhs but the upset price fixed in Ext.P2, sale notice is only `.50,000/-. It is contended that executing court has not conducted any enquiry under Rule 64 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, “the Code”) and hence Ext.P2, sale notice is vitiated. It is also contended that the property was scheduled for sale on 26-07-2010 and without any fresh proclamation the property is now scheduled to be sold on 22-11-2010 in violation of Rule 69 of Order XXI of the Code. 2. It is revealed from the submission of learned counsel that petitioner has not preferred any objection before the O.P(C).No.685 of 2010 : 2 : executing court. In such a situation, it is not necessary for this court to interfere in the matter. I make it clear that it will be open to the petitioner to raise his objection in the executing court if he is otherwise entitled to that course. I also make it clear that if petitioner is prepared to pay the amount due to the respondent and wants time for that purpose, petitioner may make such a request in the executing court and if any such request is made executing court shall decide that matter after hearing the respondent as well. This petition is disposed of with the above observation. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-