IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 26200 of 2009(O) --------------------------------------- [OS.NO.195/1999 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR] .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- P.A.ANTONY, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.ANTHAPPAN, PANAKKAL HOUSE, CHERUKADAPPURAM KARA, PUTHENVELIKKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. MR.P.K.SAJEEV. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA, NORTH KUTHIATHODE BRANCH, PIN: 683 512. 2. K.V.CHACKO, S/O.VAREED, KAITHARATH HOUSE, CHERUKADAPPURAM KARA, PUTHENVELIKKARA VILLAGE, PIN: 683 512. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C).No.26200 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September 2009 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. i) Direct the court below to keep the sale proceedings with respect to item No.2 in abeyance. ii) Direct the 2nd respondent to proceed against the Ist item of property owned by the petitioner at the first instance. iii) Direct the court below to proceed against item No.2 if sale of item No.1 is insufficient to realise the decree debt. iv) Pass such other orders which the Hon'ble Court deems git to grant to the facts and circumstances of the case. W.P.(C).No.26200 OF 2009 Page numbers 2. Petitioner is the first judgment debtor in E.P No.488 of 2003 in O.S No.195 of 1999 on the file of Sub Court, North Paravur. The writ petition is filed seeking directions / orders to the execution court to proceed against his properties, item No.1 alone and defer the sale of item No.2 property which too had been proclaimed for sale, which belongs to the second respondent / guarantor. 3. I heard the counsel for the petitioner and also the first respondent bank, the decree holder. Admittedly the decree has been passed in a suit for money by sale of the mortgage property. Such being the position, on the plea that the petitioner is the principal debtor, he cannot claim the relief sought for in the petition. Writ petition lacks merit, and it is dismissed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE vdv P.A TO JUDGE