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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 18607

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
KRISHNA BHATTATHIRI (DIED) (LHRS IMPLEADED) – Appellant
Versus
THE MANAGER SYNDICATE BANK – Respondent
RSA 683/2012



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.

TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 28TH MAGHA, 1947 RSA NO. 683 OF 2012 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.01.2012 IN A.S.NO.20 OF 1999 OF DISTRICT COURT, KASARAGOD ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.12.1998 IN O.S.

NO.27 OF 1997 OF SUB COURT, HOSDURG APPELLANT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:

1 KRISHNA BHATTATHIRI, (DIED) (LHRS IMPLEADED)

S/O. NARAYANA BHATTATHIRI, RETIRED SPECIAL GRADE CO-OPERATIVE INSPECTOR, RESIDING AT PATTENA OF NILESHWAR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, P.O., NILESHWAR.

*ADDL.2 LEELA BHATTATHIRI, AGED 75 YEARS, WIFE OF LATE KRISHNA BHATTATHIRI, KUNNATHILLAM, PATTENA, NILESHWAR, KASARGOD DISTRICT 670 314.

*ADDL.3 JAYA NARAYANAN K., SON OF LATE KRISHNA BHATTATHIRI, KUNNATHILLAM, PATTENA, NILESHWAR, KASARGOD DISTRICT. 670314.

*ADDL.4 USHA DEVI K , AGED 52 YEARS, WIFE OF MADHAVAN NAMBOODHIRI V.E., VADAKKINEDATH EDAMANA ILLAM, PURACHERRY, EZHIKODE, KANNUR DISTRICT. 670309.

*ADDL.5 SREEGANESH K , AGED 49 YEARS, SON OF LATE KRISHNA BHATTATHIRI, KUNNATHILLAM, PATTENA, NILESHWAR KASARGOD DISTRICT. 670314.

(*THE LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED APPELLANT NO. 1 ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL APPELLANTS 2 TO 5 AS PER ORDER DATED 25.08.2023 IN I.A. 1/2023.)

BY ADVS.

SRI.T.KRISHNANUNNI (SR.)

SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS 1,2 & 4 TO 7:

1 THE MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK NILESHWAR BRANCH OFFICE AT NILESHWAR NILESHWAR VILLAGE & P.O., HOSDURG TALUK, PIN- 671 314.

2 V. SURESH BHAT, S/O. VASUDEV BHAT, RESIDING AT "DEVA NIVAS"

PALLAKKAD OF NILESHWAR VILLAGE, NILESHWAR P.O., HOSDURG TALUK, PIN 671 314.

3 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD P.O., VIDYANAGAR, PIN 671 123.

4 T.C. BHAGEERATHI, W/O. LATE C.K. SUDHEER VARMA, RESIDING AT THEKKE KOVILAKAM, NILESHWAR VILLAGE, NILESHWAR P.O., HOSDURG TALUK, PIN- 671314.

5 T.C. MANORAMA, D/O. LATE C.K. SUDHEER VARMA, RESIDING AT THEKKE KOVILAKAM, NILESHWAR VILLAGE NILESHWAR P.O., HOSDURG TALUK, PIN- 671314.

6 T.C. MANDEVI, D/O. LATE C.K. SUDHEER VARMA, RESIDING AT THEKKE KOVILAKAM, NILESHWAR VILLAGE NILESHWAR P.O., HOSDURG TALUK, PIN- 671314.

BY ADVS.

SRI.DENNY DEVASSY, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER - R3 SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH - R4 & R6 THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

EASWARAN S., J --------------------------------------------

R.S.A No.683 of 2012 --------------------------------------------

Dated this the 17th day of February, 2026

JUDGMENT

This appeal is by the plaintiff in a suit for declaration of title non suited concurrently by the courts below on the ground that the earlier attempt made by the plaintiff to assert the title had been rejected in the execution proceedings.

2. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:

The plaintiff is the successful auction purchaser in a revenue sale contended by the State of Kerala for recovery of the dues under the Abkari Shops (Disposal in Auction) Rules, 1974 (Kerala). He purchased the property in auction on 22.03.1989 duly confirmed on 15.06.1989 and was issued with a Sale Certificate on 02.12.1989. While so, the first defendant instituted a suit, O.S.No.62 of 1987 for realization of amount due from the second defendant on the basis of a mortgage created by him on 06.04.1984. E.P.No.48 of 1993 was filed for the recovery of the amounts covered by the decree in O.S.No.62 of 1987. In the meantime, the first respondent bank filed an application before the Tahsildar, Hosdurg on 08.06.1988 seeking a direction to note the charge due to the bank in the same to be conducted by them. Acting on the said application, the Tahsildar on 09.06.1988 rejected the claim and held that the purchaser will be the rightful claimant of the land free of all encumbrance. It is pursuant to the said order that the property was proclaimed for sale. Later, the plaintiff filed an application on 17.11.1994 to set aside the sale in E.P.No.48 of 1993. The said applicat

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