IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 29TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 5332 of 2009(J) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ KOOROPPADA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.3965,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KOOROPPADA,KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR,KOTTAYAM. 2. VILLAGE OFFICER, KOOROPPADA. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.5332 of 2009-J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 18th day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner obtained an arbitration award under the KCS Act on account of default in repayment of a loan availed by one Abraham Chacko. That award was put in execution and the property which was offered as security was sold in auction under the KCS Act and Rules and purchased by the petitioner. Later, Canara Bank sued the aforesaid person before the DRT under the RDB Act. The petitioner herein was the 4th defendant before the DRT. The DRT concluded that the writ petitioner herein has a preferential charge over the Canara Bank and accordingly, issued Ext.P10 final order. The writ petitioner was also awarded costs to be recovered from the applicant before the DRT. So much so, there is a finally determined decision that vis-a-vis the WP(C)5332/2009 -: 2 :- Canara Bank and the petitioner, the priority of charge was in favour of the petitioner. Not only that, there is concluded sale in terms of the KCS Act and Rules. Even if there are attachments either under the Code of Criminal Procedure or KCS Act or any other provision for the time being in force, it is the settled position that no such attachment would have any overriding preference over the charge and sale in favour of the petitioner. Even if there are attachments referable to the enforcement of any proceedings in the criminal courts by way of restraint orders under Cr.P.C., they also would have no overriding effect on the finality of the title that the petitioner has got under the provisions of the KCS Act and Rules as stated above. Under such circumstances, the petitioner is well founded in raising the accusation that the mutation proceedings are inordinately delayed and that there is no reason why Ext.P9 appeal filed by the petitioner is not to be considered and disposed of, at the earliest. WP(C)5332/2009 -: 3 :- For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is ordered directing that Ext.P9 appeal will be taken up by the first respondent and decided upon in the light of what is stated above, within 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/200209