IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2009 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 25045 of 2007(F) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M/S.SOUTH KERALA CASHEW EXPORTERS, KILIKOLLUR, KOLLAM, BY PROPRIETOR, A.A.SALAM. BY ADVS. MR.T.M.CHANDRAN MR.S.SUJITH MR.JOSEPH ALBIN NEDUNTHALLY MR.V.A.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM. 2. MATHEW FRANCIS, KOTTOOKARAN HOUSE, MANALOOR POST, TRICHUR. ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED 3. K.M.VARGHESE, S/O. K.K.MATHEW, KALAN HOUSE, NELLAI, THRISSUR ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 20.9.07 IN IA. 11807/07. ADV. MR.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) FOR ADDL.R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. --------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.25045 OF 2007 ---------------------------- DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2009 JUDGMENT The case of the petitioner is that from the date of lease agreement i.e. 12/2/1999 the petitioner is in exclusive possession of the property having an extent of 2.21 Acres in Sy.No.314/1 of Chiyyaram Village. It is the petitioner's case that he is maintaining a godown-cum-drying yard in the property in question and that he got every right to possess the property in question. When some people made an attempt to evict him, he filed a suit O.S.No.22956/06 for perpetual injunction. It is submitted that the suit was dismissed after trial and the appeal filed against the judgment and decree was also dismissed. The property originally belongs to M/s.Sujir Ganesh Naik and Company. The property was mortgaged to the Canara Bank. In the proceedings initiated for recovery of the loan amount, the property was sold by the Recovery Officer under the Debts -2- W.P.(C).No.25045/2007 Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. The 2nd respondent bid in auction the property on 3/11/2006. The sale was confirmed on 17/1/2007 and delivery was effected on 4/8/2007. This writ petition is filed immediately after the date of delivery. 2. The prayer in this writ petition is for a declaration that the action conducted by the Recovery Officer is illegal and void and that the 2nd respondent has not obtained possession of the property in question and for other consequential reliefs. 3. Whether the petitioner was in possession of the property, whether he has got right to continue in possession and enjoyment of the property and whether he is entitled for a declaration as sought for are all questions of civil nature and therefore the civil court alone has jurisdiction to decide these questions. 4. The writ petition filed for the aforesaid reliefs, -3- W.P.(C).No.25045/2007 therefore is not maintainable. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. kcv.