Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 9TH MAGHA 193 WP(C).No. 30641 of 2012 (E) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- BHASURA, AGED 7 YEARS W/O. SREEDHARAN,KOLASSERIL KIZHAKKATHIL VEETTIL KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE,PADA NORTH KARUNAGAPPALLY.P.O.,PIN-690518. BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR SRI.K.JAGADEESH RESPONDENT(S) : ----------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM-690518.
2. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,KARUNAGAPPALLY BRANCH KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM-690518.
3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM-690518.
4. ANIL, S/O. SREEDHARAN, KOLASSERIL,KIZHAKKETHIL VEETTIL KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE,PADA NORTH KARUNAGAPPALLY.P.O.,PIN-690518. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. JOSEPH GEORGE R2 BY SRI.R.S.KALKURA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BP WP(C).No. 30641 of 2012 (E) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO. 1568 OF 200.OF THE KARUNAGAPPALLY S.R.O., DATED 22 5-2000. EXT.P2: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT HEREIN DATED 30 11-2012. EXT.P3: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 14 9-2012. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE BP ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================ W.P.(C) NO. 30641 OF 201.=================== Dated this the 29th day of January, 2013 JUDGMENT
The 4th respondent is the son of the petitioner. He mortgaged a property over which according to the petitioner, she has life interest. It is also her case that the mortgage was without her knowledge or consent. In any case, on account of the default committed by the 4th respondent, revenue recovery proceedings were initiated at the instance of the 2nd respondent Bank and it is therefore this writ petition has been filed. However, the case of the 2nd respondent Bank is that the mortgage was created with the consent of the petitioner and therefore the petitioner cannot resist the recovery proceedings.
2. In this writ petition, it is unnecessary for this Court to deal with the disputed question whether the mortgage was created with the consent of the petitioner or not. Suffice it to say that, if the petitioner has any life interest over the property and the mortgage was created without her consent, any coercive action initiated against the property of the petitioner will be WPC.No.30641/12 :2 : subject to the life interest the petitioner claims to have. Clarifying the position as above, the writ petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp