IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2008 / 21ST POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1539 of 2008(G) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA.1381/07 IN OA.71/2002 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONERS: -------------- 1.MARY ABRAHAM W/O.ITTIYAVIRAH ABRAHAM, AND D/O. LATE ANTONY MATHEW, RESIDING AT 10A JCI TOWER, MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KANJIKUZHI. 2.REENY THARAKAN W/O. ANTONY THARAKAN AND D/O. LATE ANTONY MATHEW, RESIDING AT AYYANATTUPURAYIL, THYCATTUSSERRY VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT. 3.ROSE MARY THOMAS @ ROSY THOMAS, W/O. THOMAS DOMINIC AND D/O.LATE ANTONY MATHEW RESIDING AT KURVINAKUNNEL HOUSE, 16A, KANARKATT, CONDOMINIUMS, TOC-H SCHOOL ROAD, VYTILLA, KOCHI-682019. BY ADV. SRI.PEARSON S.FERNANDEZ RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1.THE RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. 2.ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, BRANCH M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.1539 of 2008-G = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11th day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT 1.Having regard to the nature of the directions being issued hereunder, notice to the respondents is dispensed with. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3.Petitioners filed a claim petition before the Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal in the course of execution of a recovery certificate. The Recovery Officer is stated to have dismissed that claim petition. The relevant statute provides the right of appeal to the Tribunal. For that, the petitioners should have a copy of the order passed by the Recovery Officer. It is shown through Ext.P2 that the petitioners had WP(C)1539/2008 -: 2 :- promptly applied for a copy of the order. 4.It is stated that as of now, the property is notified for sale on 16-1-2008 and that the sale is being proceeded with without issuing the copy of the order of the Recovery Officer rejecting the petitioners' claim. 5.In the aforesaid circumstances, on production of a copy of this judgment, the first respondent will issue copy of the order passed on I.A.1381/2007 provided the application for copy is in order. The impugned sale, if listed, shall be adjourned periodically to ensure that the petitioners get a period of one month from the date of actual issuance of the copy of the order of the Recovery Officer to file appeal before the Tribunal. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/