IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2010 / 28TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 32040 of 2010(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ SHERLY EVUGIN, W/O. LATE JOSE EVUGIN, CHIRAYIL HOUSE, ETTUMANOOR, KOTTAYAM-686631. BY ADVS. SRI.K.J.SAJI ISAAC SRI.DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, PALA BRANCH, KOTTAYAM 686575. 2. RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM 682036. 3. JOBIN JOYCE, S/O. JOYCE, ELAMTHOTTAM HOUSE, CHIRAKKADAVU VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM 686520. 4. JERIN JOYCE, S/O. JOYCE, ELAMTHOTTAM HOUSE, CHIRAKKADAVU VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM 686520. R1 BY ADV.S SRI.K.S.DILIP, SC , SBT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.32040 of 2010-D ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2010. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the fourth respondent (4th certificate debtor) in DRC No.2798/SBT/KTM before the second respondent, which is a proceedings initiated on the basis of the Recovery Certificate issued in favour of the first respondent by the DRT, in O.A.No.253 of 2004. According to the petitioner, her husband who was looking after the entire affairs connected with the loan transaction and the proceedings before the Tribunal and before the second respondent, died on 31.5.2010. It is submitted that it was only after death of her husband the petitioner came to know about the case. It is revealed that, against the recovery certificate issued by the Tribunal an appeal was filed before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, and a conditional order was issued which the petitioner or her deceased husband could not be complied with. It is further revealed that the property having an extent of 72 Ares was sold by W.P(C) No.32040 of 2010-D 2 the second respondent on 23.9.2010. Respondents No.3 and 4 are the successful bidders. According to the petitioner the sale was conducted at a very low price and there was material irregularity with respect to conduct of sale. The petitioner is intending to approach the DRT challenging the sale conducted on 23.9.2010. For the said purpose the petitioner had already applied for certified copy of the relevant records. Grievance of the petitioner is that without providing a breathing time to approach the DRT, the second respondent had proceeded with further steps for confirmation and issuance of sale certificate. Hence in this writ petition the petitioner is seeking relief to restrain further actions of second respondent, in order to facilitate her to approach the appellate authority. 2. Heard; standing counsel appearing for the first respondent. It is submitted that the matter stands posted before the second respondent on 26.10.2010 for effecting confirmation of sale. 3. Under the above circumstances, I am of the W.P(C) No.32040 of 2010-D 3 opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the second respondent to keep the matter pending for a short period, in order to facilitate the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. 4. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to keep in abeyance all further steps pursuant to the sale conducted on 23.9.2010, in the DRC No.2798/SBT/KTM, for a period of one month in order to facilitate the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab W.P(C) No.32040 of 2010-D 4