1999 Supreme(Ker) 222
Kerala High Court
K.K.USHA,R.RAJENDRA BABU
G.Purushothama Panikkar - Appellant
Versus
G.Mohan - Respondent
Decided On : 07/02/1999
Important Points
Subject
Civil Law - Property Law
Act Referred
KERALA EDUCATION ACT : S.6
TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT : S.52, S.2(d)
Headnote
alienation - Court sale - Section 6 of the Kerala Education Act - 6. Restriction on alienation of property of aided school - (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law for the time being in force, no sale, mortgage, lease, pledge, charge or transfer of possession in respect of any property of an aided school shall be created or made except with the previous permission in writing of such officer not below the rank of a District Educational Officer, as may be authorised by the Government in this behalf. The officer shall grant such permission applied for unless the grant of such permission will, in his opinion adversely affect the working of the school. (2) Any person aggrieved by an order of the officer refusing or granting permission under sub-section (1) may in such manner and within such time as may be prescribed, appeal to the Government. (3) Any transaction made in contravention of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be null and void. (4) If any educational agency or the manager of any school acts in contravention of sub-section (1) or of an order passed under sub-section (2) Government may withhold any grant to the school.
Fact of the Case:
The judgment debtors objected to the sale of a property belonging to an aided school in execution of a money decree, citing Section 6 of the Kerala Education Act, which prohibits the sale of property of an aided school without prior permission. The court allowed the objection and set aside the sale.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prohibition on alienation of property of aided schools under Section 6 of the Kerala Education Act applies to Court sales, and upheld the decision to set aside the sale.
Issues: The main issue was whether the provisions of Section 6 of the Kerala Education Act imposing restriction on alienation of property of aided school would apply to a Court sale.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the legislative intent behind the ban under Section 6 is the well maintenance and proper conduct of the aided schools, and therefore, there is no reason to exclude Court sale from its area of operation. The court also found that the word 'sale' used in Section 6 would encompass both voluntary and involuntary sales.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and set aside the sale of the property belonging to the school conducted in execution of the decree, and allowed the revision petition filed by the judgment debtors.
K. Divakaran Nair, for Petitioners; M. R. Parameswaran and Eldo Paul, Addl. Advocate General, T. M. Mohammed Youseff, for Respondents.
USHA, J. :- Revision petition is at the instance of the judgment debtors in O. S. 1037/89 of the Sub-Court, Thrisaur, Respondent-decree holder applied for sale of 30 Cents of land comprised in Sy. No. 81/1 of Nedumpura village of Thalappilly Taluk in execution of the money decree. Judgment debtors filed objection to the notice under Order XXI, Rule 66, C.P.C., contending that the property sought to be sold is not liable to be sold since the property is that of a school. The above objection was disposed of by the Execution court with a direction to incorporate an objection in sale paper. Upset price was fixed and sale was posted on 23-9-1996. The above order is under challenge in the revision petition.
2. It is contended by the revision petitioner that 30 Cents of land which was directed to be sold in Court auction is part of 99 Cents of land belonging to Sree Narayana L. P. School, Vettikkattiri. Section 6 of the Kerala Education Act, 1958 contains a bar for sale, mortgage, lease, pledge, charge or transfer of possession of any property of an aided school. Therefore, according to the revision petitioners, the order directing sale of the property is unsustainable in law. An interim order of stay granted by this Court was vacated on 8-10-1996 and the execution Court was allowed to proceed with the execution.
3. C. M. A. 27/98 is filed by the decree holder in O. S. 1037/89 before the Sub-Court, Thrissur, who is the respondent in E. A. 247/97 and petitioner in E.P. 906/92. The judgment and decree in O.S. 1037/89 was under appeal in A. S. 92/92. In C. M. P. 978/92, this Court had passed a conditional order of stay on 10-10-1995 directing the appellants-judgment debtors to furnish security for the decree amount within one month. Since the above direction was not complied with, stay was vacated. The property having an extent of 30 cents in Sy. No. 81/1 in Vettikkattiri desom. Nedumbura village, Talappilly taluk, Trichur district, which was under attachment before judgment, was proclaimed for sale. As mentioned earlier, judgment debtors approached this Court by filing C. R. P. 1928/96 challenging the order passed on their objection to notice under Order XXI, Rule 66, C.P.C. Since the order of stay granted in the C. R. P. was vacated on 8-10-1996, the property was sold on 25-1-1997 and it was purchased by the decree holder.
4. Respondents-judgment debtors thereupon filed E.A. 247/97 under Order XXI, Rule 90, C.P.C., for setting aside the sale on the ground that since the property belongs to an aided school, it cannot be brought to sale in view of the provisions contained u/S. 6 of the Kerala Education Act. The application was allowed by order dt. 14-10-1997 and the sale was set aside. Aggrieved by the above, decree holder has filed the above appeal. 5-6. It was submitted by both sides that the only question to be decided in the revision petition as well as in the appeal is whether the provisions of Section 6 of the Kerala Education Act imposing restriction on alienation of property of aided school would apply to a Court sale. Since the issue involved is interpretation of Section 6 of the Kerala Education Act, 1958, and since a decision on the above issue in these two cases would have general application, we issued notice to the Advocate General on 10-2-1998. The case was then adjourned on several occasions for the convenience of the learned Advocate General and ultimately, on 11-1-1999, this Court passed an order directing the cases to be posted on 18-1-1999 and if, on that day, learned Advocate General was not available, learned Addl. Advocate General to appear to assist the Court. Thus, we heard learned counsel appearing for parties in these two cases as also Shri, T. M. Mohammed Youseff, learned Addl. Advocate General.
7. Section 6 of the Kerala Education Act reads as follows :
"6. Restriction on alienation of property of aided school :- (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law for the time being in forc