IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2009 / 7TH SRAVANA 1931 RP.No. 724 of 2009() -------------------- (AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.6.2006 IN F.A.O.NO.50/2006) REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT NO.2. ---------------------------- M.RAMADASN, S/O. RAMUTTY, AGED 75 YEARS,RESIDING AT MANNODIYIL HOUSE, VENGERI AMSOM DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------- 1. SHABU MADHAVAN,S/O. MADHAVAN, AGED 33, RESIDING AT KOTTEKUZHIYIL HOUSE, CHOOLOOR AMSOM, SAKATHAM DESOM, OF KOZHIKODE TALUK, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNY HOLDER, SHAJU MADHAVAN. 2. K.SHAJU MADHANAN, S/O. MADHAVAN, AGED 30 RESIDING AT KOTTEKUZHIYIL HOUSE, CHOLLOOR AMSOM, SAKETHAM DESOM, OF KOZHIKODE TALUK, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SHAJU MADHAVAN. 3. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER PLAYAM BRANCH, KOZHIKODE. 4. K.VELAYUDHAM.S/O. KOTTEKUZHIYIL THAMU, AGED 65,RESIDING AT KOTTEKUZHIYIL HOUSE, CHOOOLOOR AMSOM, SAKETHAM DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. 5. K.MADHAVAN, D/O.KOTTEKUZHIYIL THAMU, AGED 63,RESIDING AT KOTTEKUZHIYIL HOUSE, CHOOLOOR AMSOM, SAKETHAM DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. 6. KARTHIAYANI,D/O. KOTTEKUZHIYIL THAMU, AGED 68, RESIDING AT KOTTEKUZHIYIL HOUSE, CHOOLOOR AMSOM, SAKETHAM DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. R.P.No.724 of 2009 : 2 : 7. JANU,D/O. KOTTEKUZHIYIL THANU, AGED 66 RESIDING AT KOTTEKUZHIYIL HOUSE, CHOOLOOR AMSOM, SAKETHAM DESOM, OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. 8. DEVAYANI,D/O. KOTTEKUZHIYIL THAMU, AGED 66 RESIDING AT KOTTEKUZHIYIL HOUSE, CHOOLOOR AMSOM, SAKETHAM DESOM, OF KOZHIKODE TALUK BY ADV. SRI. V.V.SURENDRAN FOR R1 AND R2 BY ADV. SRI.SATHISH NINAN FOR R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANA KANNAN FOR R4 TO R8 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------- R.P.No.724 of 2009 in F.A.O.No. 50 of 2006 ------------------------------- Dated this the 29th July, 2009 O R D E R Bhavadasan, J. This petition is filed seeking a review of the judgment, dated 10.6.2009, in F.A.O.No.50 of 2006. In the said judgment, this Court has set aside the sale, directed the court below to re-consider the matter, in accordance with law. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner has submitted that the appellants' claim that they have coparcenary rights in the property will not stand, as they have no locus standi. It is further submitted that there were several litigations between the parties and they have become final, and, therefore, the petition to set aside the sale itself is not maintainable before the court below. The learned counsel also pointed out that there are no grounds to interfere with the order of the court below, as the appellants are absolute strangers to R.P.No.724 of 2009 2 the property. The sale had been confirmed years back. Hence, prayed to review the judgment. 3. It may at once be noticed that the appeal was allowed on the sole ground that 2.08 acres of land were sold for a paltry consideration of Rs.20,000/=. This Court found that there was no application of mind by the court below in the proper manner. The court below did not consider whether the entire property needs to be sold for satisfying the decree debt. Hence, it has been held that the sale was vitiated and it was set aside. Therefore, we find no grounds to interfere in this review petition. 4. However, it is brought to out notice that a sum of Rs.20,000/= has been deposited by the auction purchaser and the amount is in deposit for the last several years. The appellants will deposit the said amount with 20% simple interest from the date of sale till the date of payment, along with additional 5% of purchase money, as enjoined by law, within a period of two months from today. On deposit of the amount, the R.P.No.724 of 2009 3 sale shall stand set aside. The auction purchaser is entitled to withdraw the amount. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN , JUDGE. nj.