IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2011 / 28TH ASHADHA 1933 WA.No. 964 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.3821/2011 Dated 28/05/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------- JOSEPH K.C., S/O.LATE CHACKO, KOLATTUKUDI HOUSE, MANJAPRA P.O., ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S): / RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, FINANCE TOWER, KALOOR, KOCHI-682017. 2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(RR), KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM-682017. 3. WILSON CHAKKAPPAN, CHAKKIYATHMODA VEEDU, MARIGIRI, MANJAPRA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682581. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM-682030. 5. DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR), KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 6. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (H) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. ADV. SRI.M.M.SAYED MUHAMMED, SC, KFC FOR R1 SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.SREEKUMAR THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/07/2011, ALONG WITH WA NO. 985 OF 2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... W.A.Nos.964 & 985 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 19th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. The appellant availed loan from the Kerala Financial Corporation. On account of chronic default the respondent Corporation was compelled to initiate recovery proceedings. The factory building and land mortgaged for the loan was notified for sale and the same was purchased by the 3rd respondent in W.A.No.964/2011 on 17/09/2009. Full payment was made by the purchaser on 17/10/2009 and sale was confirmed as per proceedings dated 25/06/2010 and sale certificate was also issued on 26/07/2010. In between the appellant was pursuing his remedies before the statutory authorities all of which thoroughly failed. Consequently, possession was handed over to the purchaser on 18/01/2010. The appellant's last challenge against the sale of the property before the learned Single Judge was also unsuccessful. W.A.Nos.964 & 985/2011 2 However the sale certificate issued required a correction for which the purchaser filed a Writ Petition before this Court. The appellant filed WP(C) challenging the revisional order of the Government refusing to interfere with the sale, while the WP(C) filed by the purchaser was for getting revised sales certificate for the property. The learned Single Judge upheld the purchaser's case by ordering issuance of revised sales certificate and dismissed the appellant's challenge against the recovery proceedings leading to sale of the property. It is against this common judgment, the appellant has filed separate Writ Appeals. 2. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned counsel appearing for the purchaser and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the KFC. The KFC's counsel clarified that after setting off Rs.30 lakhs and odd received towards sales consideration for the mortgaged property, the KFC has to recover a further amount of around Rs.1.20 crores from the appellant. We do not know W.A.Nos.964 & 985/2011 3 what purpose will be achieved by the appellant getting the sale cancelled because, further consideration that the property may fetch will certainly go to the financial institution and not to the appellant. The appellant's case is that the property will fetch a higher value if sold in the open market. We do not think this is a ground for interference because property price is going up steadily and therefore the property sold two years back certainly will fetch higher value. In our view, the appellant has no right to claim increase in the value, which will go to the purchaser, who has invested funds two years back. Consequently, we do not find any merit in the appellant's challenge against the sale proceedings. Therefore these Writ Appeals are dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) jg