IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 30468 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.NARAYANI AMMA, W/O.,MANIYARA AMBU PODUVAL, R/AT PUTHUVAI, BALLA VILLAGE, P.O.BALLA, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SENIOR INSPECTOR/SALES OFFICER, KOTTANCHERRY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, P.O.KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD. 2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KASARAGOD. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. KOTTACHERRY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD. ADV. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI FOR R2 & R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C)No.30468/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.11.2002 BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OFO THE E.P.280/2003 DATED 19.12.2005 OF MUNSIFF COURT, HOSDURG. / TRUE COPY / P.S.TO JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.30468 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st March, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs.30,000/- from the 4th respondent bank way back in the year 1999. Since he defaulted repayment of the loan, the bank filed A.R.C.No.2095 of 2001 wherein the Arbitrator passed an award on 7.8.2001. Even thereafter the petitioner did not discharge the liability. The bank thereupon initiated steps to execute the award and in execution of the award, the land belonging to the petitioner which was offered as security for the loan was brought to sale and sold on 19.12.2005 in the auction the bank bid the property for the sum of Rs.1,00,100/-. As on the date of sale the amount due to the bank was Rs.77,048/-. After setting off the the said sum, the bank remitted the sum of Rs.23,052/- in the Court of the Munsiff of Hosdurg, where the award was put in execution. The sale in favour of the bank was also confirmed. This writ petition was filed long thereafter challenging Ext.P2 order passed by the execution court confirming the sale in favour of the bank and seeking re- W.P(C) NO.30468/2008 -:2:- conveyance of the property sold in execution of the award. The bank has filed a counter affidavit. In paragraph 7 thereof it is stated that as on 30.11.2008 the petitioner was liable to pay the sum of Rs.84,256/- and that besides the said amount the petitioner will also have to pay the expenses incurred by the bank towards stamp duty for registration of the sale certificate in its favour, for obtaining reconveyance. It is stated that as on 31.11.2008 the total amount due to the bank was Rs.92,766/-. 2. I heard Sri.Kodoth Sreedharan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.K.Vijayamohanan, learned standing counsel appearing for the 4th respondent. I have also gone through the pleadings and the materials on record. From the materials on record it is evident that the land belonging to the petitioner was sold in execution of an award on 19.12.2005. The sale was confirmed and a sale certificate was issued in favour of the 4th respondent bank. The petitioner did not challenge the sale or its confirmation and it has become final. When the bank thereafter proceeded to sell the property of which it is the owner, by public auction after obtaining the prior approval of the general body and the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies in terms of W.P(C) NO.30468/2008 -:3:- rule 54(2) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, the petitioner moved the bank and the Joint Registrar seeking re- conveyance of the property. Her claim is based on the contention that in a similar situation the bank had permitted two other creditors to obtain re-conveyance of the property on payment of the amount due as on the date of sale with future interest at the rate of 6.28% per annum. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that she is similarly placed and therefore, the bank should re-convey the property on her depositing the sum of Rs.92,766/- which was due from her as on the date of sale, namely 19.12.2005 with future interest thereon calculated at the rate of 6.28% per annum. 4. The 4th respondent bank is a co-operative society. Its main object is to advance loans and to render service to its members. Acquiring property and transacting business in real estate is not an object of the bank. Therefore, the primary concern of the bank should be to recover the loan advanced by it with interest and costs. It is no doubt true that under rule 54(2) the bank has to obtain the prior approval of the general body and the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies before disposing of its W.P(C) NO.30468/2008 -:4:- property. In the instant case such approval has already been obtained. In such circumstances I am of the opinion that the bank should re-convey to the petitioner the property on the petitioner depositing with the bank the amount that was due from her as on the date of sale, namely the sum of Rs.92,766/- and future interest thereon calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of sale till realisation. A Division Bench of this Court has in an unreported decision in W.A.No.182 of 2010 issued a similar direction. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with the following directions. (a) The second respondent bank shall, within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment inform the petitioner in writing of the amount due from her as on 28.2.2011, computed with reference to the amount due from her as on 19.12.2005 (Rs.92,766/-) and the interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum. (b) The petitioner shall deposit the said amount, either in lump or in instalments, on or before 30th June 2011. (c) Upon such payment being made, the bank shall re- W.P(C) NO.30468/2008 -:5:- convey the property to the petitioner. The petitioner shall meet the expenses, if any, required for the said purpose, namely the stamp duty, if any, payable on the instrument and the registration and other charges. (d) If the petitioner fails to make the payment on or before 30th June, 2011 this direction shall stand recalled and the writ petition shall stand dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.30468 of 2008 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 1st March, 2011