AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Gopinath P, J
The petitioner has approached this court challenging Ext.P3 sale notice proposing to sale of property belonging to the petitioner for recovery of an amount of Rs.81,34,867/-.
The petitioner is a surety for certain transactions of the 3rd respondent with the Kerala State Financial Enterprises (KSFE). According to the petitioner the property belonging to the petitioner was offered as security only in respect of one chitty transaction of the 3rd respondent and not in respect of all the chitty transactions of the 3rd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is willing to clear off the liability in respect of the chitty transaction in respect of which the property of the petitioner was mortgaged and the property of the petitioner cannot be proceeded against for recovery of the amounts due under other chitty transactions.
The learned counsel appearing for the KSFE would submit that the contention taken on behalf of the petitioner that the property of the petitioner was offered as security only in respect of one chitty transaction of the 3rd respondent is absolutely incorrect. It is submitted that the 3rd respondent had a total of 23 chitty transactions with the KSFE and in respect of each of these transactions the property of the petitioner has been offered as security.
The learned Government Pleader refers to the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent and submits that the contention of the petitioner that he had offered his property only in respect of one chitty transaction of the 3rd respondent does not appear to be correct. It is submitted with reference to paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit of the 1st respondent that, as per the records maintained by the KSFE the property of the petitioner was offered as security for 4 transactions in respect of recovery proceedings had been initiated by the 1st respondent.
This writ petition came up for admission before this court on 26-03-2015. Thereafter it was posted on 07-04-2015. The writ petition has not been admitted. It came up for hearing before this court on 12-01-2024. On which date it was adjourned to 19-01-2024. On 19-01-2024 it was adjourned to 30-01-2024. On 30-01-2024 it was adjourned to 31-01-2024. On 31-01-2024 this court passed the following order:-
“At the request of the counsel for the petitioner, post on 05-02-2024 as last chance. No further adjournments will be granted under any circumstances.”
On 05-02-2024 the matter has been adjourned to be listed today. Even today there is no appearance for the petitioner. That apart, in the light of the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the KSFE and in the light of the averments contained in the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, there is no material before this court to suggest that the property of the petitioner was offered as security only for one chitty transaction of the 3rd respondent. Further, a dispute of this nature cannot be adjudicated in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed.