LAWS(KER)-2024-3-210

UNIVERSAL AGENCIES Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

Decided On March 21, 2024
UNIVERSAL AGENCIES Appellant
V/S
STATE BANK OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt (the law assists those who are vigilant and not those who are indolent). If there is a case that calls upon this Court to apply the principle contained in the above maxim, this is it.

(2.) These writ petitions are intrinsically connected with each other and essentially relate to the same subject matter. Therefore, they can be conveniently disposed of by common judgment. W.P(C.) No.16718 of 2016 is filed praying inter alia for a direction to the State and Revenue officials, namely respondents 1, 2, 3 and 4 in that writ petition not to effect mutation with regard to 1.70 acres of land in Sy.Nos.848/1A/1/1, 848/1D, 847/6A and 847/6B in Mullackal Village and another 35.073 cents in Sy.Nos.515/7A/2 and 515/6B/2 of Alappuzha West Village in Ambalapuzha Taluk of Alappuzha District, in the name of respondents 5, 6, 9, 10, 13 (13th respondent has subsequently been deleted from the array of parties) or anybody claiming under them. W.P.(C.) No.6557 of 2017 has been filed challenging Ext.P16 order dtd. 7/10/2002 of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.A.No.115/2002 and also seeking to quash the sale proclamation in D.R.C No.1036/SBI/ALP in O.A.No.115/2002 and to set aside the sale conducted by the Recovery Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal on 18/3/2004 and 30/9/2004, in respect of the properties covered by Exts.P2 and P3 documents. The learned Counsel appearing for various parties agrees that W.P.(C.) No.6557 of 2017 may be taken as the lead case. Therefore, exhibits and the parties referred to in this judgment are as they are marked in W.P.(C.) No.6557 of 2017, unless specifically indicated to be otherwise.

(3.) The 1st petitioner is a partnership firm. The 2nd and 3rd petitioners are its present partners. Going by the pleadings in the writ petition, the firm was originally constituted through a deed of partnership dtd. 1/4/1992 by three persons together with the 3rd petitioner, who is the wife of the 2nd petitioner. It is stated that on 1/2/1997, the three other partners, except the 3rd petitioner, retired from the partnership and the 2nd petitioner was inducted into the partnership. The 2nd petitioner obtained 170 cents of land in Sy.Nos.848/1A/1/1, 848/1D, 847/6A and 847/6B in Mullackal Village of Ambalapuzha Taluk of Alappuzha District under a family partition deed, which is on record as Ext.P2 dtd. 17/2/1997. The 2nd petitioner also purchased another item of property having an extent of 35.73 cents of land in Sy.Nos.515/7A/2 and 515/6B/2 of Alappuzha West Village in Ambalapuzha Taluk of Alappuzha District by Ext.P3 document dtd. 18/2/1997. The properties covered by Exts.P2 and P3 documents were mortgaged with the State Bank of India, Main Branch, Beach Road, Alappuzha to avail credit facilities for the business of the partnership firm. On default being committed, the bank initiated proceedings under the Recovery of Debts And Bankruptcy Act, 1993, (earlier known as "the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993') before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam by filing O.A.No.115/2002. Through Ext.P16 order dtd. 7/10/2002, the Original Application was allowed and the State Bank of India was permitted to recover a total amount of Rs.1,36,73,307.00 (Rupees one crore thirty six lakhs seventy three thousand three hundred seven only) together with interest at 12% per annum from the date of Original Application till realization. Following the issuance of a recovery certificate, the properties were notified for sale by the Recovery Officer in D.R.C. No.1036/SBI/ALP in O.A.No.115/2002. The property covered by Ext.P3 document was sold in an auction on 18/3/2004 and the property covered by Ext.P2 document was sold in an auction on 30/9/2004. Since there were no applications for setting aside the sale conducted in terms of the provisions contained in the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961, the sale conducted in respect of both items of properties have been confirmed. The petitioners are now before this Court seeking the reliefs as aforesaid.