Radhakrishna Kuries Pvt.Ltd. v. Sunitha Shanmughan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2015/31ST ASHADHA, 1937 WA.No. 1425 of 2015 () IN RP.547/2014 --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN RP 547/2014 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 01-10-2014 APPELLANT(S)/REVIEW PETITIONER/3RD PARTY:
------------------------ RADHAKRISHNA KURIES PVT.LTD., GURUVAYUR, REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN PREMANANDHAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O SRENIVASASN, PULICKAL HOUSE, POOKODE VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 SUNITHA SHANMUGHAN AGED 36 YEARS W/O. SHANMUGHAN PUDUKKAD RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. APIV/377 KUNNAKULAM MUNICIPALITY, CHITTANJUR DESOM ARTHAT VILLAGE, THALAPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2. DEWAN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.
REP. BY ITS MANAGER, 2ND FLOOR, SALPA COMPLEX NEAR WEST FORT JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, THRISSUR KERALA-680004.
3. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER DEWAN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., 2ND FLOOR SALPA COMPLEX, NEAR WEST FORT JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD THRISSUR, KERALA-680004.
R2&3 BY ADV. SRI.P.PAULOCHAN ANTONY BY SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J.
& A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
================ W.A. No. 1425 of 2015 ==================== Dated this, the 22nd day of July, 2015
J U D G M E N T
Ashok Bhushan, C.J.
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.
2.
This writ appeal has been filed against order dated 1/10/2014 passed in R.P.No.547/2014 in WP(C) No.24345/2013. WP(C) No.24345/2013 was filed by the auction purchaser consequent to sale notice issued by the Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. The property in question was mortgaged with the Corporation which had initiated proceedings under SARFAESI Act, 2002. The sale certificate was issued by the Corporation on 3/10/2012. The writ petition was filed by the auction purchaser praying that direction be issued for execution of sale deed. The writ petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 4th November, 2013 directing for execution of
W.A.No.1425/15 -:2:- sale deed in favour of the writ petitioner. Subsequently, contempt proceedings was also filed and ultimately the sale deed was registered.
3.
Appellant on the basis of court attachment has come up in the review petition praying that the order in R.P. be reviewed. He submits that an attachment was effected on 13th July, 2006 in respect of a loan advanced on 8th August, 2005 whereas mortgage in favour of the 2nd respondent is anterior (29/3/2005). Learned Single Judge has dismissed the review petition observing that if the review petitioner has any grievance, he can agitate the same under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act, 2002. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the borrower was not made party to the writ petition. In the writ petition, relief was claimed for issuing a direction to execute the sale deed. The sale certificate was already issued and even if the borrower was not made a party, the Court was fully competent to grant relief. More so, the borrower had never come up either by a review petition or
W.A.No.1425/15 -:3:- any other proceedings challenging the sale under SARFAESI Act, 2002.
We do not find any error in the order of the learned Single Judge dated 1st October 2014 rejecting the review petition filed by the appellant. We do not find any merit in the appeal. Writ appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN, CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE Rp //True Copy// PS to Judge