IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND AUGUST 2011 / 11TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 15630 of 2011(C) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. SIBI GEORGE, S/O. A.K.GEORGE, INJACKAL HOUSE, VAKKAD P.O., MONEPPALLY, KOTTAYAM. 2. MATHEW GEORGE, S/O. A.K.GEORGE, INJACKAL HOUSE, VAKKAD P.O., MONEPPALLY, KOTTAYAM. 3. A.K.GEORGE, S/O. JOSEPH, INJACKAL HOUSE, VAKKAD P.O., MONEPPALLY, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.ALEX.M.SCARIA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KOTTAYAM-686 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, VAIKOM-686 141. 3. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE KADUTHURUTHY URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K.399, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 604, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. 4. THE KADUTHURUTHY URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K.399, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 604, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 5. THE SALE OFFICER, THE KADUTHURUTHY URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO. K.399, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 604. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.S.ABDUL SALAM ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN FOR R3-4 SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR FOR R3-4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 15630/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 25.11.1999 EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 25.11.1999 EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BEFORE THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, VAIKOM DATED 27.4.2000 EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 1.2.2010 EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 5.2.2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE vps P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 15630 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed challenging the sale of an item of immovable property pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 sale notices and seeking an order directing the fourth respondent bank to permit the petitioners to pay off the arrears due to the fourth respondent bank in instalments. 2. Pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 sale notices, two items of immovable property, having a total extent of 84 cents, situate in Sy. No.517/4 of Neezhoor Village, Vaikom Taluk, Kottayam District was sold in public auction on 27.3.2000. The fourth respondent bank was the successful bidder in the auction. The petitioners did not take steps to have the sale set aside by filing an appropriate application either under rule 82 or 83 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules. More than a decade later, the petitioners have approached this Court challenging the sale and praying for an opportunity to pay the entire amount due in instalments. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission/hearing on 21.6.2011, Sri.T.R.Harikumar, learned standing counsel appearing for the fourth respondent bank submitted that though the sale was confirmed in favour of the fourth respondent bank long back, till date WPC No.15630/2011 2 sale certificates have not been issued. The learned standing counsel also submitted that as on 30.3.2011 the amount due from the petitioners was Rs.13,16,000/-, that if the petitioners pay the said amount with future interest from 31.3.2011, the bank is prepared to re-convey the property and return the documents of title deposited by the petitioner as security for the loan transaction. He also submitted that if the petitioners directly approach the bank, the bank is prepared to give certain other concessions also. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners thereupon submitted that the petitioners will move the fourth respondent bank. 4. When the writ petition came up for hearing today, Sri.Alex M.Scaria, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners may be given three months' time to pay the entire arrears. The learned standing counsel appearing for the fourth respondent submitted that even after the order passed by this Court on 21.6.2011, though the petitioners approached the fourth respondent bank, they did not make or tender any payment towards the amounts due from them as on 31.3.2011. 5. It is not in dispute that the immovable properties belonging to the petitioners were sold on 27.3.2000. More than 11 years have WPC No.15630/2011 3 passed thereafter. It was only on 9.6.2011 that the petitioners came forward with a challenge to the sale held on 27.3.2000. Though the bank was prepared to re-convey the property to the petitioners on their paying the amount due as on 31.3.2011 with future interest, the petitioners have not so far deposited any amount towards discharge of their liability. That apart, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies has been periodically issuing circulars giving concessions to persons who have availed loans from co-operative institutions. Circular No.63 of 2010 dated 23.12.2010 was issued in continuation of earlier circulars whereby substantial concessions were extended to persons like the petitioners, who had availed loans from the co-operative institutions. The said circular was in force till 28.2.2011 and its validity was extended till 31.3.2011 by Circular No.19 of 2011 dated 23.2.2011. The petitioners did not take steps to avail the benefit of the said circular. Recently, by Circular No.41 of 2011 dated 23.6.2011 the Registrar of Co-operative Societies has once again granted substantial concessions to persons like the petitioners who have availed loans from co-operative institutions. The said circular is in force till 15.8.2011. Notwithstanding these facts, the petitioners have not so far taken steps to deposit any amount. It is thus evident WPC No.15630/2011 4 that the request made by them for an opportunity to discharge their liability in instalments is bereft of bonafide. If the petitioners had been serious in repaying the debt they would have taken steps to avail the benefit of the circulars and paid the amount due from them. Even though more than one month has passed after the order dated 23.6.2011 was passed, the petitioners have not not so far deposited any amount whatsoever towards the discharge of their liability. I am therefore not satisfied that the offer now made by the petitioners to repay the loan is bonafide. As noticed earlier, the sale in question was held on 27.3.2000. More than 11 years have passed thereafter. The petitioners have no explanation whatsoever for not challenging the sale in time. The challenge to the sale is highly belated and cannot be entertained at this stage. I accordingly hold that there is no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.15630/2011 5 P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 15630 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of June, 2011 O R D E R Sri.T.R.Harikumar, learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4 submitted that though the properties were sold pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 and the sale was also confirmed in favour of the fourth respondent bank, till date, the sale certificates have not been issued. The learned standing counsel also submitted that as on 30.3.2011 the amount due from the petitioners was Rs.13,16,000/- (Rs.Thirteen lakhs sixteen thousand only), that if the petitioners pay the said amount with future interest from 31.3.2011, the bank is prepared to re-convey the property and to return the documents of title deposited by the petitioners as security for the loan transaction. He also submitted that if the petitioners directly approach the bank, the bank is prepared to give certain concessions. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners will therefore move the fourth respondent bank. The aforesaid submissions are recorded. Post after a week. WPC No.15630/2011 6 P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps