IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2010 / 4TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 10217 of 2010(B) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 8.2.2010 IN DRC 836 IN OA.608/1998 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.P.LILLY, W/O. LATE T.V.SIMON, AGED 68 YEARS, THOLATH-HOUSE, CHALISSERY.P.O., PALAKKAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CANARA BANK, TRITHALA BR. PALAKKAD DIST. REP. BY ITS MANAGER. 2. JOHNSON C C,S/O. C.T.CHERU, LAVANYA, 34/982, ANCHUMANA ROAD, MAMANGALAM, COCHIN-24. 3. RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, KSHB OFFICE COMPLEX, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHIN-36. ADV. SRI.M.P.RAMNATH FOR R2 SRI.PAULY MATHEW MURICKEN,SC,CANARA BAN FOR R1 SRI.T.P.GEORGE (MEDIATOR) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.10217 of 2010-B ---------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T The deceased husband of the petitioner had availed a loan from the first respondent Bank, which however was not repaid on time, leading to further steps taken by the Bank for causing the property to be sold in public auction. 2. In furtherance to the steps taken as above, the concerned property was sold in public auction on 27.1.2010 and the sale was confirmed in favour of the second respondent, as borne by Ext.P2 dated 17.3.2010 issued by the third respondent, which is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 3. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court, further proceedings were intercepted subject to certain terms. Subsequently, as requested by the learned counsel appearing for both the sides, the chance of settlement was explored with the help of an expert meaditor. Pursuant to the mediation, by the expert meaditor, it has now been reported that the dispute has been settled and the meaditor has filed a report dated 22.7.2010 W.P(C) No.10217 of 2010-B 2 under Rule 23 of the ADR Rules along with mediated settlement agreement under Rule 24, with the terms agreed as given below: “1. The 1st respondent Bank has already withdrawn Rs.6,10,000/- (Rupees six lakhs and ten thousand only) from DRT, being the bid amount deposited by the 2nd respondent. In addition to the above, the petitioner agrees to the release of a sum of Rs.2,10,000/- (Rupees two lakhs ten thousand only) to the 1st respondent Bank towards discharge of the liability due in respect of the property covered in order of confirmation of sale dated 8.3.2010 issued by Recovery Officer, DRT, Ernakulam (produced as Exhibit P2) from the amount in deposit in DRT, Ernakulam. The 1st respondent bank need not file any specific or separate application for the purpose. 2. In respect of property covered in order of confirmation of sale dated 8.3.2010 issued by Recovery Officer, DRT, Ernakulam, the 1st respondent bank agrees to record full satisfaction in respect of the mortgaged property and no further proceedings will be initiated against this property. The title deed in respect of the property shall be released to the mortgagor or his duly authorized Power of Attorney Holder. 3. The petitioner agrees to deposit a further sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) on or before 28.7.2010 to DRT, Ernakulam (in addition to Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs only) already deposited.) Out of Rs.10,40,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs forty thousand only) the petitioner agrees to the release of Rs.8,30,000/- (Rupees eight lakhs thirty thousand only) to the 2nd respondent directly from Recovery Officer DRT, Ernakulam on or before 7.8.2010 and on deposit of the above stated Rs.40,000/- before the Recovery Officer, DRT, the Recovery Officer shall release payment of Rs.8,30,000/- in favour of the 2nd respondent on or before 7.8.2010 for which the 2nd respondent need not file any specific or separate application. The petitioner also agrees release of Rs.2,10,000/- to the 1st respondent bank as per clause (1) above on or before 7.8.2010. 4. The auction sale and sale certificate in respect of the property covered in the order of confirmation of sale of dated 8.3.2010 issued by recovery officer, DRT, Ernakulam shall stand set-aside on payment of the amounts as above. In the event of such payments not being effected within the time frame stated above, this compromise shall stand cancelled and the sale W.P(C) No.10217 of 2010-B 3 confirmation issued by DRT will not be affected. 5. The 2nd respondent auction purchaser has no objection in DRT taking necessary steps for cancellation of entry, if any, passed in the records of the concerned Sub Registrar of Assurances, pursuant to the sale conformation certificate dated 8.3.2010 issued by Recovery Officer, DRT, Ernakulam. 6. This settlement will not absolve the balance liability of the certificate debtors in DRC No.836 in O.A.No.608/1998 of DRT, Ernakulam. 7. The settlement will not affect the right of the bank to proceed against property mentioned in item No.2 of the Annexure (2) statement filed by the 1st respondent bank in the above Writ Petition. 8. The parties to the compromise shall have no further claims against the others on the subject matter of this settlement, except to the extent herein above stated.” 4. In the above circumstances, the matter is recorded as settled as per the above terms. Accordingly, Ext.P2 is set aside and it is made clear that the above proceedings will not stand in the way of the Bank in proceeding against item No.2 property mentioned in Annexure A2 statement filed by the Bank. 5. The petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-, to the Meaditor as the Mediator's fee, in respect of the successful mediation, within one week and produce proof in this regard. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab