IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 32125 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP.247/2004 IN OS.341/2000 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. NARAYANANKUTTY, S/O.RAMAN, AGED 41 YEARS, PARAKKATTUKALAM, MOOTHACHETTIKULAMBU, THATHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, CHITTU TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST. 2. L.LAKSHMI, W/O.RAMAN, AGED 68 YEARS, PARAKKATTUKALAM, MOOTHACHETTIKULAMBU, THATHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.BALAGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD., REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, THATHAMANGALAM. 2. THE KERALA STATE FARMERS' DEBT RELIEF COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SHRI P.SANTHALINGAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.32125 of 2008 Y -------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT First respondent appears through counsel. Heard counsel for petitioners and first respondent. 2. First respondent obtained Ext.P1, decree for realisation of money against the petitioners and initiated execution proceedings. Property is being brought up for sale on 3.11.2008 as per order in E.P.No.247 of 2004 in O.S.No. 301 of 2000 of Principal Sub Judge, Palakkad. Claim of the petitioners is that they are entitled to the benefit of the Kerala Farmers' Debt Relief Commission Act, 2006 (for short, 'the Act'). According to the petitioners, first petitioner has already preferred Ext.P3, application before the Commission established as per the provisions of the Act seeking benefit under the Act. But, that application has not so far been disposed of. Prayer in this petition is for a direction to the second respondent to expedite disposal of Ext.P3, application and in the meantime, to keep the sale of the property in abeyance. 3. Counsel for first respondent contends that the question whether petitioners are entitled to the benefit of the Act is to be decided by the Commission as provided under the said Act. WP(C) No.32125/2008 2 4. Without understanding the volume of work or the applications pending before the Commission, it is not proper or justifiable to issue any direction for early disposal of the application as prayed for by the petitioners. At the same time, interest of the petitioners is likely to be affected if the property is sold as apprehended by the petitioners before a decision is taken on the application. Hence, it will be open to the petitioners to request the Commission for early disposal of the application if any, preferred by them. In the meantime, it is directed that the sale of the property scheduled to be held on 3.11.2008 in E.P.No.247 of 2008 in O.S.No.301 of 2000 of Principal Sub Court, Palakkad will stand in abeyance for a period of three weeks on condition that petitioners shall file statement in the executing court before the time scheduled for sale, without prejudice to the contentions raised by the petitioners in this proceeding, waiving fresh proclamation for sale. With the above observation, Writ Petition is closed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. cks