IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2008 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 37091 of 2008(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.J.MICHEL, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 58 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, VARAKIL HOUSE, KUMPARA BAZAR, KOODARANHI, PIN - 673 604, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.SURENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KOODARANHI CO-OPERATIVE RURAL HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.NO.D.2328, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, KOODARANHI CO-OPERATIVE RURAL HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.NO.D.2328, KOODARANHI, PIN - 673 604, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING FEDERATION, HOUSEFED, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SENIOR INSPECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES/ARBITRATOR-CUM-SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING FEDERATION, HOUSEFED, KOZHIKODE-6. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.37091 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT Notice to the respondents dispensed with, preserving their right to move for review of this judgment, if aggrieved. 2. The petitioner is a debtor of the first respondent. Sale proceedings are being held under the control of respondents 2 and 3. Obviously therefore, the third respondent is exercising powers referable to the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules. The petitioner has two contentions. Firstly, he states that the amount fixed for recovery is not finalised by giving due credit to all amounts already paid. That apart, according to him, interest on interest is being charged and this is against the provisions of some of the binding circulars. These are matters which the petitioner can effectively raise before the third respondent. WPC.37091/08 Page numbers 3. The next contention is that there are three items of properties and it would be sufficient that only one of the items is sold. Any plea of sufficiency of proceedings against one item or that the entire items need not be sold, are matters for the consideration of the third respondent since that is a method for reaching at the complete and due execution, discharge and satisfaction of the award. Therefore, if the petitioner raises such contentions before the third respondent, the same will be considered and appropriate decision taken thereon. 4. The petitioner has also a case that if he is given a short time, he would be in a position to find out a purchaser for one of the items of properties and the amount that the purchaser would bring in, within one month from now, would be sufficient to wipe off the entire debts. The petitioner is given liberty to do so and the respondents will also consider receiving the entire outstandings and closing the transaction accordingly. To enable the aforesaid, the impugned sale will stand adjourned to 28.2.2009. The petitioner will not be entitled to any fresh notice WPC.37091/08 Page numbers of such sale. There need not be any fresh proclamation or notice of the sale also. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.