Orders affecting parties' rights must ensure procedural fairness by allowing all stakeholders to be heard.

JUDGMENT :

P.V.BALAKRISHNAN,J

This appeal is filed by the 1^st respondent in W.P.(C)No.42253 of 2022, aggrieved by the order dated 18.02.2025 of the learned Single Judge in I.A.No.3 of 2024 in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in that writ petition.

2. W.P.(C)No.42253 of 2022 has been filed by the 1^st respondent herein claiming to be a bona fide purchaser of Exts.C5 to C7 properties mentioned in Ext.P1, seeking the following reliefs:

“1. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ directions or orders directing the 1^st respondent to cause valuation of C5-C7 properties mentioned in Exhibit P1 order within a time prescribed by this Hon'ble Court.

2. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ directions or order commanding the 1^st respondent to accept the value of the properties in respect of C5 to C7 mentioned in Exhibit P1 and grant No Objection to lift the order of attachment issued by the 3^rd respondent.

3. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ directions or order directing the 3^rd respondent to cause the lifting of attachment over the properties covered by C5 to C7 in Exhibit P1 order on payment of the value as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

4. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ directions or order directing the 4^th respondent to efface the attachment over properties covered by C5 to C7 in Exhibit P1 order once the payment of the value of the property is remitted by the petitioner with the 1^st respondent as directed by this Hon'ble Court.”

3. During the pendency of the writ petition, the learned Single Judge ordered valuation of the afore properties, and as per order dated 13.04.2023, directed the appellant to accept the higher value shown by the valuers, i.e., Rs.5,85,21,989.89 and grant a 'no objection' to lift the order of attachment issued by the 3^rd respondent herein over the aforesaid properties. The order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 13.04.2023 reads as follows:

“See order dated 30.01.2023 and 03.02.2023. The valuers have filed reports. As per the report filed by one valuer the value of the property is Rs.3,48,81,000/-. The second valuer has valued the property as Rs.5,85,21,989.89/-. There will be a direction to the 1^st respondent to accept the higher value shown by the valuers i.e., Rs.5,85,21,989.89/- and grant a “No Objection” to lift the order of attachment issued by the 3^rd respondent. It is made clear that the valuations made by the valuers as aforesaid, will not affect the contention of the 2^nd respondent that the valuation by both the valuers are high and the property actually will not fetch the said value. The said contention is kept open for final consideration. If the petitioner deposits the above said value within two days, the 3^rd respondent shall lift the attachment over the properties covered by C5 to C7 in Ext.P1”

4. As per the order referred above, the 1^st respondent herein/petitioner deposited the amount with the appellant/1^st respondent and the attachment came to be lifted.

5. Later, the 1^st respondent herein/petitioner filed I.A.No.1 of 2024 on 24.09.2024 seeking an order directing the appellant to deposit the afore amount in an interest bearing Fixed Deposit pending adjudication of the liability. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 15.11.2024, allowed that application. The said order reads thus:

“This application has been filed for a direction to the 1^st respondent to consider deposit of the amount of Rs.5,85,21,989.89 pursuant to the order dated 13.04.2023 in an interest bearing fixed deposit pending adjudication of the liability. On 13.04.2023, this Court had considered the reports filed by the valuers of the property and directed the 1^st respondent to accept the higher value shown by the valuers, i.e., Rs.5,85,21,989.89 and grant a No Objection to lift the order of attachment issued by the 3^rd respondent. It was made clear that the valuations made by the valuers as aforesaid, will not affect the contention of the 2^nd respondent that the valuation by both the value