Dismissed

Muhammed Ali Jawahar v. the Special Sale Officer

Kerala HC4 Dec 2023WP(C)/23509/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged an auction of their mortgaged property due to banking dispute. Court noted third-party rights arose post-auction and declined to intervene in enforcement, directing petitioners to seek setting aside the sale under Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules.

What did the court decide?

None. Petitioners directed to approach competent authority under Rule 82 of Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules to set aside the sale.

Muhammed Ali Jawahar Vs the Special Sale Officer — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 23509 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1MUHAMMED ALI JAWAHAR
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O ABDUL JABHAR, FURATH, A.K.G NAGAR,MATTANNUR,
KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN - 670002

¶8

2 SULAIGHA DHAWARI AGED 45 YEARS W/O ABDUL JABHAR, FURATH, A.K.G NAGAR, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670002

¶9

3 KAMALUDHEEN AGED 55 YEARS S/O KUNJALI, FURATH, A.K.G. NAGAR, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN - 670002

¶10

4 ABDUL JABHAR.N.P.K. AGED 50 YEARS S/O KUNJALI, FURATH, A.K.G. NAGAR, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN – 670002

¶11

BY ADVS.
M.R.REENA
P.S.SUJETH

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER/ INSPECTOR OF CO-OP SOCIETIES, KEEZHALLUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO.F 1455 , OFFICE OF THE ASST. REGISTRAR OF CO- OP OCIETIES(GENERAL) KOOTHUPARAMBA., PIN - 670643

¶14

2 THE SECRETARY KEEZHALLUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO F1455 VAYANTHODE, MATTANNUR P.O, PIN – 670002

¶15

BY ADVS.
GOVERNMENT PLEADER
M.SASINDRAN

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C) NO.23509 Of 2023
 2

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 4^th day of December, 2023

¶20

The petitioners 1 to 3 availed three loans of `25 lakhs, ₹50 lakhs and ₹45 lakhs from Keeezhallur Service Cooperative Bank Limited in the year 2019 for a term of ten years. The petitioners mortgaged their property by depositing a Title Deed along with the building. The petitioners state that on failure to repay the loan amount, the respondents initiated coercive proceedings. Sale of the petitioners’ property including the building was effected on 19.07.2023. Now, the total outstanding payable by the petitioners is 1,01,10,262/-.₹ In this writ petition, the petitioners seek to pay the said outstanding amount in installments.

¶21

Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel denied all the allegations made by the petitioners in the

¶22

WP(C) NO.23509 Of 2023

¶23

¶24

writ petition. The Standing Counsel pointed out that the total amount outstanding in the account of the petitioners as of now is more than 1.62 Crores. On the failure of the petitioners to₹ repay the amount, the property was put to sale on 07.11.2023 and the property has already been sold in auction. The petitioners now cannot claim to pay the outstanding amount in installments and repossess the property, as third party rights have arisen. The proper remedy of the petitioners is to approach the competent authority to set aside the sale.

¶25

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents.

¶26

The petitioners have approached this Court seeking to direct respondents 1 and 2 not to proceed any further in pursuant to Exts.P1, P2 and P3 Sale Notices, to consider Ext.P4 representation submitted by the petitioners and to regularise the loan account by paying the overdue amount in equal monthly

¶27

WP(C) NO.23509 Of 2023

¶28

installments. It is to be noted that when the writ petition came up for admission, this Court passed an interim order on 05.09.2023 directing the petitioners to pay an amount of 20 lakhs within a₹ period of one month. On that condition, the interim order passed by this Court on 19.07.2023 of stay of proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 to P3 was extended.

¶29

The petitioners failed to make the payment as directed by this Court on 05.09.2023 and therefore the interim stay granted by this Court stood expired. The respondents therefore put the property in auction and auctioned the property on 07.11.2023. Due to the auction conducted by the respondents, now third party rights have arisen.

¶30

In the circumstances, it will not be proper for this Court to interfere in the matter and grant to the petitioners opportunity to pay the amount in installments. The writ petition is therefore dismissed. However, it will be open to the petitioners to approach the competent authority invoking Rule 82 of the

¶31

WP(C) NO.23509 Of 2023

¶32

¶33

Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules to set aside the sale of the property of the petitioners. The petitioners will be free to prosecute Ext.P10 for setting aside the same, if they are so advised.

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

hmh

WP(C) NO.23509 Of 2023

¶38

¶39

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23509/2023

¶40

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶41

Exhibit -P1A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE NOTICE EP
NO.58/2021 ISSUED IN FAVOR OF THE 1ST
PETITIONER DATED 04-03-2023
Exhibit - P 2A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE IN EP
NO.59/2021 DATED 19-12-2022 FOR AN
AMOUNT OF RS.69,93,115 /-ISSUED AGAINST
THE 2ND PETITIONER
Exhibit -P 3A TRUE COPY OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED
NOTICE DATED 11-07-2023 RECEIVED BY THE
4TH PETITIONER

¶42

Exhibit -P4A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
13-07- 2023
Exhibit -P 5A TRUE COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPTS
DATED 15/7/2023

¶43

Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE DEPOSIT
OFTHE1STPETITIONER(DATED
15/7/2023 ,13/3/2023,25/10/2023,13/2/202
3,16/9/2022,29/8/20222TOTALRS
7,49,998)

¶44

Exhibit P7TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE DEPOSIT
OFTHE2NDPETITIONER(DATED
29/8/2022,25/10/20222,22/2/2023,15/7/202
3 TOTAL RS 5,4,9998)

¶45

Exhibit P8TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE DEPOSIT
OF THE 3RD PETITIONER (DATED 13/3/2023,
22/2/2023,25/10/2022, 15/7/2023 TOTAL RS
6,89,997)

¶46

Exhibit P9TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE DEPOSIT
OFTHE4THPETITIONERDATED
25/10/2022(RS 1,99,999)

¶47

Exhibit P10A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
23-11 -2023 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER GIVEN TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT
FOR SETTING ASIDE THE SALE ON DEPOSIT PF
AMOUNT

¶48

WP(C) NO.23509 Of 2023

¶49

¶50

RESPONDENT ANNEXURES

¶51

`ANNEXURE R2(A)`	`A TRUE` `LOAN` `PETITIO`	`COPY OF` `ACCOUNT` `NER`	`THE SB ACCOUNT LEDGER AND` `LEDGER OF THE 1ST`
`ANNEXURE R2(B)`	`A TRUE` `LOAN` `PETITIO`	`COPY OF` `ACCOUNT` `NER`	`THE SB ACCOUNT LEDGER AND` `LEDGER OF THE 3RD`
`ANNEXURE R2(C)`	`A TRUE` `OF THE`	`COPY OF` `2ND PETI`	`THE LOAN ACCOUNT LEDGER` `TIONER`

Muhammed Ali Jawahar v. the Special Sale Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed Ali Jawahar v. the Special Sale Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Ashraf, Vs State Bank of India

Abdul Rahim.v., Vs State Bank of India

Aneesh Vs Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Rehna Muhammed Salih Vs the Village Officer

Renjith V.S. Vs the Authorised Officer

Anil Thomas Vs the Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Ltd. (Erstwhile Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ld