LAWS(KER)-2010-8-458

THAMPI SEBASTIAN Vs. THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED

Decided On August 12, 2010
THAMPI SEBASTIAN Appellant
V/S
The Federal Bank Limited Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice to respondent is dispensed with in view of the order I am proposing to pass in this Writ Petition.

(2.) Petitioner, judgment debtor No. 1 in E.P. No. 465 of 2007 in O.S. No. 404 of 2002 of the Court of Learned Sub Judge, North Paravur challenges Ext.P4, sale notice on the ground of inadequacy of land value stated therein. Petitioner states that he did not get notice under Order XXI Rule 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, "the Code"). Learned Counsel states that 71 cents of land which is valued more than Rs. 25 lakhs is proposed to be sold for a paltry sum of Rs. 4,47,000/ -. According to the learned Counsel Ext.P4, sale notice is invalid since Order XXI Rule 66 of the Code has not been complied with.

(3.) If petitioner has a contention that he did not get notice under Order XXI Rule 66 of the Code, his remedy is before executing court. It is also open to him to challenge Ext.P4, sale notice in case it is issued without notice to him and without compliance of Order XXI Rule 66 of the Code. Having regard to the facts and circumstances when the petitioner has the above options before him I do not find reason to interfere with Ext.P4, sale notice at this stage. I leave open the contentions of petitioner as to the validity of Ext.P4.