IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2011 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 16266 of 2011(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER --------------- THRISSUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, HEAD OFFICE OF THE THRISSUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.DEVAPRASANTH.P.J. RESPONDENT: --------------- THE SUB REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, OLLUKKARA, THRISSUR, PIN-680 007. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 16266 of 2011(G) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED MORTGAGE DEED NO.1686/01/99 OF OLLUKKARA SRO DATED 12.05.99. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE SALE CERTIFICATE DATED 03.12.2010. EXT.P3 : THE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 19.03.2011. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 16266 OF 2011 ......................................................................... Dated this the 17th June , 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of the stand taken by the respondent in refusing to register the sale certificate produced by the Bank with regard to the sale effected in favour of the successful bidder pursuant to the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. The sequence of events as narrated in the writ petition shows that the defaulter borrowed some amount from the bank creating security interest over the property in question . But the borrower turned to be a defaulter under which circumstances, there was no other alternative for the bank but to proceed with steps under the SARFAESI Act, declaring the account as 'NPA'. In the course of the proceedings, the property was sold in public auction and Ext.P2 sale certificate has been issued to the successful bidder. However, when the same was taken to the respondent, it was refused to be registered stating that there was some attachment over the property in question as narrated in Ext.P3, which made the petitioner to approach this Court 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, by virtue of the relevant provisions of law, the sale effected under W.P.(C) No. 16266 OF 2011 2 the SARFAESI Act is absolute and notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law or contract; by virtue of the non-obstante clause incorporated in the Statute. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the mortgage created by the borrower was as early as in 1999. Admittedly, the attachment proceedings pending before the Civil Court are of the years 2000, 2005 and 2008. This being the position, the orders of attachment passed by the civil court cannot have any significance with regard to the rights and liberties of the parties concerned 4. In the above circumstance, this Court does not require any second thought to come to a conclusion that the contentions raised by the petitioner are perfectly justified . Hence, there will be a direction to the respondent to register the sale certificate as and when the same is presented; provided the same is otherwise in order and all the statutory requirements are satisfied. The writ petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk