IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 9TH OCTOBER 2009 / 17TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 26724 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SEVI KUMAR, CHULLIKATTU, CHERRANALLORE.P.O ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.ALTHAF RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE(ASSOCIATE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA) HEAD OFFICE: THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH ERNAKULAM, SBT BHAVAN-PANAMPILLY NAGAR, REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, (CHIEF MANAGER-SARC-ARMB ERNAKULAM). R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. SATHISH NINAN, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: shg/ C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 26724 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. The petitioner is claiming that he is the purchaser of 5.46 (13.5) Ares of property covered under Ext.P1 Sale Deed. According to the petitioner after purchase of the property he had effected mutation in the revenue records and is paying land tax. Subsequently he received notice issued by the 2nd respondent under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) in which it is revealed that the property in question was mortgaged by the vendor of the property for securing loan availed from the 2nd respondent Bank. The respondents proceeded with the steps for taking over possession of the property, and it was put in auction as evidenced by Ext.P6 sale notice. W.P.(C)No. 26724 of 2009 -2- 2. Pursuant to filing of this Writ Petition, this Court passed an interim order restraining the respondents from confirming sale if any conducted pursuant to Ext.P6 notice. 3. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that pursuant to Ext.P6 notice auction was conducted on 23.09.2009 and the highest offer received by the Bank is for an amount of Rs.40,02,750/-. It is further submitted that the bidder has deposited the entire amount. But confirmation of the sale could not be made in view of the interim order issued by this court. 4. Having confronted with the above position, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is prepared to make payment of the sale amount along with interest if any to be paid to the auction purchaser and expenses incurred by the Bank. He seeks direction to release the property from the mortgage on payment of such amount. Since the auction was not confirmed, I am of the W.P.(C)No. 26724 of 2009 -3- opinion that issuance of notice to the proposed purchaser is not necessary, at the same time his interest can be protected by directing the Bank to refund the deposit along with interest at the rate of 12%. Therefore I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be permitted to pay off the amount as stated above and to get release of the property in question. 5. Accordingly the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent Bank to inform the petitioner about the total amount to be paid by him ie. the sale amount of Rs.40,02,750/- along with 12% interest till the date of payment to be paid to the auction purchaser and expenses of sale if any incurred by the bank. The respondent bank will communicate such intimation within a period of one month from today. The petitioner is directed to pay off the entire amount as per such intimation in two (2) equal installments on or before 10.11.2009 and 25.11.2009. On the event of the petitioner paying the entire amount as W.P.(C)No. 26724 of 2009 -4- stated above the Bank will release the property out of the mortgage. It is further made clear that on payment of the amount by the petitioner, the Bank will release the amount deposited by the auction purchaser to him, along with interest due as stated above, without any further delay. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE shg/