IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2011/25TH PHALGHUNA OP (DRT).No. 1050 of 2011 ( ) ----------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------- 1. SUJIR SURESH NAYAK, S/O.LATE SUJIR KESAV NAYAK, KASTHOORI BUILDING MUMBAI - 400 020. 2. SUJIR DINESAN NAYAK, S/O.LATE SUJIR KESAV NAYAK, KASTHOORI BUILDING MUMBAI - 400 020. 3. SUJIR ANANTH NAYAK, S/O.LATE SUJIR KESAV NAYAK, KASTHOORI BUILDING MUMBAI - 400 020. 4. SUJIR SAROJINI NAYAK, W/O.LATE SUJIR KESAV NAYAK, KASTHOORI BUILDING MUMBAI - 400 020. (PETITIONERS 1 TO 4 ARE REP. BY THEIR DULY CONSTITUTED POWER OF ATTORNEY N.RAMANKUTTY NAIR, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, NO.41 VRINDAVA BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN SRI.S.SUJITH SRI.V.A.SASIDHARAN SRI.JOSEPH ALBIN NEDUNTHALLY RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, PANAMPILLY NAGAR KOCHI - 36. 2. CANARA BANK, THAMARAKULAM BRANCH, KOLLAM - 691 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 3. SMT.GEETHANJALI PAI, MUNDAKKAL, KOLLAM - 1, NOW RESIDING AT U.S.A., REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY SRI.P.K.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI PULIMOOTTU PUTHEN VEEDU, KANNIMEL CHERI, KILIKOLLUR KOLLAM - 691 004. BY SRI.P.GOPINATH MENON, SC, CANARA BANK THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-03-2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP (DRT).No. 1050 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF PROCLAMATION DTD.13.2.2011 PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY. EXT.P2: COPY OF I.A NO.575/2011 IN DRC 40 EXT.P3: COPY OF I.A NO.611/2011 IN DRC 47 EXT.P4: COPY OF I.A. NO.608/2011 IN DRC 212 EXT.P5: COPY OF I.A NO.610/2011 IN DRC 348 EXT.P6: COPY OF I.A No.609/2011 IN DRC 562 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- O.P(DRT) No.1050 of 2011-O ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioners have approached the 1st respondent under Ext.P2 to P6 applications seeking to set aside Ext.P1 proclamation and seeking time for payment of amounts due under the recovery certificate, by arranging private sale or mortgage or lease of the properties proclaimed for sale. It is stated that Exts.P2 to P6 applications were dismissed by the 1st respondent on 14.3.2011. It is further stated that inspite of an application submitted by the petitioners to get a certified copy of the order, the 1st respondent has not issued a copy, till date. 2. Grievance of the petitioners is that even without issuing copy of the order dismissing Exts.P2 to P6 applications and even before expiry of the period of limitation prescribed for appeal under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, the 1st respondent has now proclaimed sale of the properties mentioned in Ext.P1, on today (16.3.2011). O.P(DRT) No.1050 of 2011-O : 2 : Under such circumstances the petitioners seek direction to defer the sale proclaimed under Ext.P1, till a copy of the order dismissing Exts.P2 to P6 applications is served on the petitioners and till the petitioners could file appeal against such order before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. 3. Heard; standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent Bank. It is contended that, with respect to the properties proclaimed for sale, the petitioners are not the legal heirs of its original owner, who was a partner of the firm and who availed the loan. It is further contended that a huge amount of more than Rs.91 crores is due to be recovered as per the recovery certificate. It is also pointed out that on an earlier occasion the petitioners have approached this Court seeking identical reliefs when sale was proclaimed and this Court had directed the 1st respondent to issue orders dismissing similar applications. It is stated that pursuant to the said judgment issued by this Court in W.P(C) No.1205/2010 dtd.22.2.2010, the petitioners have filed appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. O.P(DRT) No.1050 of 2011-O : 3 : 4. Considering the facts and circumstances and rival contentions I take note of the fact that, even if the sale takes place, the petitioner can challenge the sale by resorting to appropriate remedy provided under Rule 60 of the II Schedule to the Income Tax Act. It is also noticed that, sale if any takes place can be confirmed only after a period of 30 days as per Rule 63 of the above said Rules. Under such circumstances interest of justice will be served if a direction is issued to the 1st respondent to furnish copy of the orders on an early basis, in order to facilitate the petitioner to file appeal against such orders and till then to stay confirmation of sale, if any takes place. It will be left open to the petitioners to seek appropriate interim relief regarding sale if any takes place pursuant to Ext.P1 proclamation. 5. In the result, the original petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to furnish certified copy of orders, if any, issued on Ext.P2 to P6 applications, on usual terms, at the earliest, at any rate within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. O.P(DRT) No.1050 of 2011-O : 4 : 6. Sale if any takes place on today pursuant to Ext.P1 proclamation shall not be confirmed for a period of one month from today. Meanwhile, it is left open to the petitioners to challenge orders of the 1st respondent by preferring statutory appeal if permitted under law and to seek appropriate interim relief. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab