IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2009 / 14TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22247 of 2009(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. A. NESAMMA, AGED 46 YEARS, W/O.ARULAPPAN, KAPPITHOTTATHIL VEEDU, NELLIKUZHI, KARUPPOOR P.O., NEDUMANGAD. 2. P. RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. PANDARAM PILLAI, CHOTHI, KALLUVILA, UZHAPPAKONAM, KARUPPOOR P.O., NEDUMANGAD. 3. S. RAGHUNATHA PILLAI, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. SUBBAYYA PILLAI, PADMAVILASOM, THARATTA, KALLARA, THIRUVANANTHPAURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.D.ASOKAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPETATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. PALODE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK, LTD., NO. T. 862, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PALODE, KARIMANKODU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 4. THE SALE OFFICER, PALODE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., PALODE, KARIMANKODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSHKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.22247 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P1, a sale notice issued by the 4th respondent for sale of the property mortgaged by the petitioner, for realizing the dues mentioned therein. Admittedly, the notice in question was issued on 15.6.2009 and sale is scheduled to take place on 11.30 a.m tomorrow. It is at this last moment that the writ petition is filed. Therefore for delay and laches itself the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. As far as the irregularities in the proposed sale are concerned, despite having received the notice at least six months prior to the date of the sale, the petitioner has not so far raised any objection before the Sale Officer and therefore this court will not be justified in considering such contentions. For these reasons, I am not inclined to admit the writ petition. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) vi/ JUDGE