IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2008 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 8153 of 2008(U) ------------------------- DRC.1060/05 IN OA.138/2002 of DRT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ K.N.RAZIYA, D/O.AHMED, AGED 34 YEARS, KIZHAKKE NARANGOLI, VELLIYODE AMSOM, KODIYOORA DESOM, BADAGARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ SRI.ANOOP JOSEPH SRI.ABHILASH AKBAR SRI.T.B.SIVAPRASAD RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION BANK OF INDIA, KOZHIKODE MAIN BRANCH, MARIAMBI BUILDINGS, CHEROOTTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE 673 302, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF MANAGER. 2. SHAJI, S/O.USMANKUTTY, THAZNEEM MANZIL, THADANILAM PARAMBU, KANNANCHERY, KOZHIKODE. 3. RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, KERALA & LAKSHADWEEP, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV.SRI.A.V.THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.8153 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the recovery officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 application and Ext.P3 stay petition. Learned counsel for the Bank submits that by now, the sale was followed by the issuance of sale certificate and there is no reason to let the petitioner further drag on the proceedings. 2. The authority under Rule 87 of the second Schedule to the Income Tax Act is one that authorises rectification of mistakes by the procedure called review. The actual conduct of sale following a proclamation is not the making of an order. Once there is an order to sell, that order is given effect to by making the sale. That is why the Rule provides for opportunity to apply to set aside the sale on different grounds, that too, by fixing certain time limit for applying to do so. If one were to concede WPC.8153/08 Page numbers an application for review of the sale, and if such an application may be filed at any point of time, it may tend to render meaningless, the provisions to set aside the sale. Be that as it may, learned counsel for the petitioner says that once there was a certification for private sale, the petitioner is entitled to seek review on the ground that the certificate for private sale was not notified to the certified debtors. In the aforesaid circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing that if Exts.P2 and P3 are received and pending, the same shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law, after considering the question of its maintainability and after hearing learned counsel for the bank also. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.