IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 2ND ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 28336 of 2008(W) --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED / / IN I.A. 1426/08 IN OA.447/1997 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. M/S.DENTIFRICES, EFFERMINT HOUSE, WEST FORT ROAD, POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR - 680 002. REPRESENTED BY PARTNERS. 2. A.V.RUKHIA, W/O.T.C.ABDUL RAZAK, AGED 57 RESIDING AT THEKKANCHERRY HOUSE, P.O.PALUVAYI, VIA. CHAVAKKAD, TRICHUR DIST. 3. N.K.RAMLA, W/O.T.C.KHALID, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT THEKKANCHERRY HOUSE, P.O.PALUVAYI, VIA. CHAVAKKAD, TRICHUR DIST. 4. A.V.RAZIA, W/O.T.K.KUNHABDU, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT THEKKANCHERRY HOUSE, P.O.PALUVAYI, VIA. CHAVAKKAD, TRICHUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.AVINASH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, THRISSUR MAIN BRANCH, THRISSUR - 680 001, KERALA. 2. RECOVERY OFFICER, DRT, COCHIN. 3. DEBT.RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I CHENNAI (IN CHARGE OF DRT, COCHIN). THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) NO. 28336 OF 2008 (W) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T The complaint of the petitioner is that the recovery officer of DRT, Kerala and Lakshadweep has proceeded with sale of an item of property in spite of the fact that applications were filed before the DRT, Kerala and Lakshadweep for stay and for transfer of the case to DRT, Chennai. 2. After O.A. No.447/1997 was decided by DRT, Kerala and Lakshadweep, the petitioner carried an appeal to the DRAT, Chennai as R.A. No.18/2006 and the Appellate Tribunal issued its decision on 6-9-2006 modifying the order of the DRT substantially reducing the interest rates and other dues. Even going by the plea of the petitioner in paragraph (2) of the writ petition; though the matter relates to a transaction in Kerala and proceedings in DRT, Kerala and Lakshadweep the decision of DRAT, Chennai was challenged before the High Court of Judicature, Madras by filing W.P.(C) No.41948/2006. It is stated W.P.(C) No.28336/2008 - 2 - that a conditional interim order was passed in that case. The learned counsel for the bank states that the petitioner was required to pay an amount of Rupees one crore in terms of that order and that the said condition has not been complied with. S.R.No.14824/2007 was filed before that court for modifying that interim order. The fact remains that the petitioner has not complied with the conditions of that interim order and remains unsuccessful to obtain any modification of the interim order, mentioned above. Therefore, I do not find any illegality in the recovery officer of DRT, Kerala and Lakshadweep proceeding with the impugned sale particularly, when the petitioner would have sufficient time to move the Madras High Court even before the sale would be confirmed. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE skr/25/9 // True copy // P.A. to Judge.