IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 24118 of 2007(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SEBASTIAN GEORGE, S/O. SEBASTIAN, AGRICULTURIST, PAMBLANIAL HOUSE, THABORE, PULINGOME VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR DISTRICT, KANNUR. 2. THE TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), TALIPARAMBA. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PULINGOME VILLAGE, PULINGOME, CHUNDA P.O. ADDL. 4. REVENUE DIVISIONAL, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 5-2-2008 IN I.A. NO. 1633/08. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Appendix Petitioner's Exhibits:- P1: True copy of the receipt bearing No.6793 dated 16-12-2006 showing the amount remitted before the 2nd respondent. P2: True copy of the receipt dated 8-1-2007 showing the amount remitted before the 2nd respondent. P3: True copy of the lawyer notice dated 28-6-2007 sent by the petitioner's counsel to the respondent. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 24118 of 2007 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner submits that 2.6 Acres of land in Resurvey No. 127/1 of Pulingome Village was proceeded against for realizing Bank loan and dues to the KSHB. It is stated that an auction was held and that the petitioner was the successful bidder. Accordingly, bid amount of Rs.2,85,500/- was remitted by the petitioner as is seen from Exhibits P1 and P2 receipts. However, sale certificate was not issued and it is therefore, that this writ petition has been filed for appropriate orders. 2. From the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent what emerges is that on enquiry made by them, they came to the conclusion that the sale was not conducted properly and in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit, it is stated that RDO has decided to cancel the auction, although no formal order of cancellation has been issued, in view of the above, the petitioner now prays for a direction to the second respondent to refund the amount deposited by the petitioner towards the sale W.P.(C) No. 24118 / 2007 2 consideration. 3. Now that the sale has been decided to be cancelled, there is no justification for retaining the amount deposited. Hence, the 4th respondent is directed to issue necessary directions to the 2nd respondent to release the amount deposited by the petitioner. 4. Petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment before the additional 4th respondent, who shall immediately issue necessary direction as ordered above. The claim of the petitioner for interest on the amount deposited is left open. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm