SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 292

Supreme Court of India
P. SATHASIVAM & B.S. CHAUHAN
Kerala Financial Corporation
Versus
Vincent Paul & Another
Civil Appeal No. 3446 of 2003 with Civil Appeal No.3450 of 2003 & Civil Appeal No.3451 of 2003
Decided on: 14-03-2011

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appearing Parties:Rajendran Nair, V. Giri, C.S. Rajan, R. Sundarvardan, Sr. Advocates, P.V. Dinesh, K.R. Nambiar, Roy Abraham, Ms. Seema Jain, Vikas Garg, Himinder Lal, P.I. Jose, E.M.S. Anam, Fazlin Anam, K.R. Nambiar, Vipin Nair, P.B. Suresh (for M/s. Temple Law Firm), Advocates.

Headnote:

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 - Section 29 - Advertisement – Enquiry – KFC in Mathrubhumi Malayalam Daily inviting tenders from intending buyers for purchase of the property - Last date for submission of tender Pursuant to same only one bidder one Vincent Paul submitted tender quoting an amount bid amount and also deposited earnest money stipulated in tender notice - On same day after discussion and negotiation between KFC and Vincent Paul KFC issued letter to said Vincent Paul expressing its willingness to sell property subject to certain conditions - Massif Court seeking injunction to restrain KFC from taking any action pursuant to auction sale proceedings and on very same day Judge directed to maintain - By informed Vincent Paul that further proceedings of sale could be finalized only after vacating temporary injunction ordered by Munsif Court Thrissur - Held, - Court have already concluded that decree for specific performance granted by High Court cannot be sustained - Court also observed in earlier part of our judgment that though KFC has initiated proceedings Section admittedly State has not framed Rules or guidelines in form of executive instructions for sale of properties owned - Till such formation of Rules or guidelines orders as mentioned above court direct KFC to adhere following directions for sale of properties sale are correct valuation report and fixing reserve price - Proper valuation has not been made and reserve price is fixed taking into consideration inaccurate valuation report intending buyers may not come forward treating property as not worth purchase - Reserve price means price with which public auction starts and auction bidders are not permitted to give bids below said price minimum bid auction KFC has not strictly followed above procedure in bringing property - Accordingly court set aside judgment and order passed by High Court granting decree for specific performance in favor of Vincent Paul and all other sale transactions either in form of tender or auction in respect of property in question - Court direct KFC to first issue advertisement calling for tenders by way of public auction by following directions mentioned above - Before resorting to such recourse if KFC has accepted any deposit from any parties by way of tender or bid same shall be returned within period of days to respective parties with simple interest date of such deposit till it is repaid parties concerned - Appeals disposed

Judgment

P. Sathasivam, J.

1) These appeals are filed against the judgments and orders dated 27.11.2001 and 22.01.2002 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in A.S. No. 557 of 2000 and O.P. No. 33834 of 2001 respectively.

2) Brief facts:

(a) The Kerala Financial Corporation (in short "the KFC"), a Public Sector Undertaking, is a State Financial Corporation. On 24.10.1977, a loan of Rs.50 lakhs was sanctioned by the KFC to a firm called Cable India (hereinafter referred to as "the Firm") on hypothecation of land and machinery. In view of consistent failure of the firm to repay the loan, on 11.09.1987, the KFC took over the firm under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (in short "the Act"). On the same day, the Firm filed O.S. No. 2194 of 1987 with I.A. No. 1776 of 1987 for temporary injunction restraining the KFC from taking over the firm.

(b) On 07.10.1988, a notice was published by the KFC in Mathrubhumi Malayalam Daily inviting tenders from intending buyers for purchase of the property. The last date for submission of tender was 31.10.1988. Pursuant to the same, only one bidder, i.e. one Vincent Paul, submitted the tender quoting an amount of Rs. 7.5 lakhs as bid amount and also deposited the earnest money of Rs. 10,000/-as stipulated in the tender notice. On the same day, after discussion and negotiation between the KFC and Vincent Paul, the KFC issued a letter to the said Vincent Paul expressing its willingness to sell the property for Rs. 8.25 lakhs subject to certain conditions.

(c) By letter dated 01.11.1988, the Firm filed O.S. No. 2109 of 1988 before the Munsiff Court, Thrissur, seeking injunction to restrain the KFC from taking any action pursuant to the auction/sale proceedings and on the very same day the learned Judge directed to maintain status quo as on 31.10.1988.

(d) By letter dated 05.11.1988, the KFC informed Vincent Paul that further proceedings of the sale could be finalized only after vacating the temporary injunction ordered by the Munsif Court, Thrissur. On 10.11.1988, I.A. No. 1776 of 1987 in O.S. No. 2194 of 1987 filed by the firm was dismissed. On 17.01.1992, O.S. No. 2109 of 1988 was also dismissed and the injunction was vacated. Against the said order, on 26.02.1992, the Firm filed A.S. No. 56 of 1992 before the District Judge, Thrissur. In the meantime, on 03.02.1993, the first suit i.e. O.S. No. 2194 of 1987 itself was dismissed. Against the said order, the Firm filed AS. No. 146 of 1993 before the District Judge, Thrissur.

(e) On 06.12.1994, Vincent Paul filed a suit bearing O.S. No. 1522 of 1994 before the subordinate Judge, Thrissur for specific performance of the agreement of sale. Subsequent to the filing of the said suit, the appeals i.e. A.S. No. 56 of 1992 and A.S. No. 146 of 1993 were dismissed by a common judgment dated 10.04.1995 by the Addl. District Judge, Thrissur. The suit for specific performance i.e. O.S No 1522 of 1994, filed by Vincent Paul was also dismissed by the Sub-ordinate Judge, Thrissur, vide judgment dated 07.03.2000, holding that there is no concluded contract between the parties so as to entitle the plaintiff to a decree for specific performance. Against the said order, on 18.09.2000, Vincent Paul filed A.S. No. 557 of 2000 before the High Court of Kerala.

(f) On 17.09.2001, the KFC invited fresh tenders for the sale of assets. One K.K. Ummer Farook responded to the tender by making an offer of Rs. 55,55,555/-for the land and building which was the highest amount among the four offers received. In the meantime, by judgment dated 27.11.2001, the Division Bench of the High Court allowed A.S. No.557 of 2000 filed by Vincent Paul, consequently decreed the suit filed by him. Against the said judgment, the KFC filed Civil Appeal No. 3446 of 2003 before this Court by way of special leave petition. Challenging the same judgment, K.K. Ummer Farook filed Civil Appeal No. 3450 of 2003 before this Court by way of special leave petition. K.K. U














































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top