The High Court of Kerala dismissed a writ appeal challenging a judgment in an execution petition of a housing loan defamation. The court held no statutory provision compels the Society to wait for the appellant's future gratuity.
Writ Appeal is dismissed subject to observation regarding specific amount recovery.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2009 / 1ST SRAVANA 1931
WA.No. 1586 of 2009()
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.18615/2009 Dated 13/07/2009
APPELLANT: PETITIONERS
BY ADV. SMT.PREETHA ANIL RAVINDRAN
RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
& C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
--------------------------------------------W.A. NO. 1586 OF 2009 ---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2009
JUDGMENT
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The writ petitioners are the appellants. They are defaulters of the first respondent - Society in relation to a housing loan availed of by them. Since they defaulted to pay the amount, the Society moved the Arbitrator by filing A.R.C. No. 21 of 2002. The same was decreed. The Society moved Execution Application No.16 of 2007 before the Sale Officer. Pursuant to that, the Sale Officer issued Ext.P3 sale notice. The second appellant is an employee of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation who retired from service on 30.6.2007. The appellants submitted that a total amount of Rs.35,000/- was recovered from the salary of the second appellant by the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, but the same has not been given credit to by the Sale Officer. Secondly, it is submitted that the Society may be directed to wait till the second appellant gets her D.C.R.G. from the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation.
W.A. NO.1586/2009
2
In the result, the Writ Appeal is dismissed, subject to the observation regarding the amount of Rs.35,000/- covered by Ext.P1.
(K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR) JUDGE
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE
sp/
W.A. NO.1586/2009
3
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
W.A. NO.1586/2009
JUDGMENT
23rd July, 2009
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Society is bound to wait until the appellant receives her gratuity from the employer before proceeding with recovery.
Whether the Sale Officer must give credit to an amount recovered from the salary of the second appellant.
K.N. Sadananadan & Another
Alappuzha Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd.
Senior Inspector of Co-Operative Societies
K. Balakrishnan Nair
C.T. Ravikumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
