IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2010 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WA.No. 2010 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.10922/2010 Dated 08/04/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ K.ABDUL SALAM,PROPRIETOR, CROWNTEX, TC 28/2322, SREEKANDESWARAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-23. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. AUTHORISED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER, INDIAN BANK, ARM BRANCH-11,ETHIRAJ SALAI,CHENNAI- 600 088. 2. M/S.EAST WEST TRAVEL AND TRADE LINKS LIMITED, 75 F,NEHRU ROAD, WHILE PARLE, EAST MUMBAI, PIN 400099,REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. NASIRUDDHIN A.WAHID,M/S.EAST WEST TRAVEL AND TRADELINKS LIMITED, 75F, NEHRU ROAD, NEAR CENTAUR HOTEL, VILA PAREL(E),MUMBAI 400 099. 4. SHIHABDDIN A WAHID, M/S.EAST WEST TRAVEL AND TRADELINKS LIMITED, 75F, NEHRU ROAD,NEAR CENTAUR HOTEL, VILA PAREL(E), MUMBAI 400 099. SHRI.S.EASWARAN, FOR F1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. ---------------------------------- W.A. No.2010 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 1st day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Bank. 2. The appellant, as a tenant of the building, which was being given as security for the loan availed of by its owner, is challenging the sale in recovery proceedings. The appellant also participated in the tender, but his tender was rejected for defects. However, on being asked about the amount quoted by him, it happens to be less than the price at which it is sold by the Bank to another person. The appellant, as a tenant, has no right to oppose the securitisation proceedings initiated by the Bank for recovery of the arrears. So far as the rejection of the appellant's tender is concerned also, we find no merit in the case because the price offered by W.A.No.2010/2010 -2- him was less than the price at which the building was sold. Consequently, the Writ Appeal is devoid of any merit and is dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JUDGE) jg