A writ petition challenging specific auction notices becomes infructuous when the property is subsequently sold in a later auction process, rendering the initial challenge technically obsolete with liberty reserved for the petitioner to challenge the final sale separately.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner had availed credit facilities from the 4^th respondent bank. On default being committed, the bank initiated proceedings under Section 69 of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act, 1969 and obtained Awards determining the liability of the petitioner. In proceedings for execution of the Awards, Exhibits P1 and P2 notices were issued regarding sale of the mortgaged property . At that stage, the petitioner approached this court by filing the above writ petition and seeking the following reliefs:-

‘’1. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order, quashing Exhibit P1, P2 Sale notice.

2. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any appropriate writ order or direction, directing the respondents 3, 4 and 5 to consider Exhibit P3 representation and to avail one time settlement benefits to the petitioner and also to provide sufficient time to repay the loan amount and permission to conduct private sale of his properties.’’

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank submits that the sale pursuant to Exhibits P1 and P2 did not take place. It is submitted that the total liability in terms of the Awards obtained by bank is in excess of Rs.1.40 Crores. It is submitted that, the property was again brought to sale in the month of February -2026 and the property was purchased by the bank itself in auction. It is submitted that since the reliefs sought for in the writ petition is pertaining to the sale proposed pursuant to Exhibits P1 and P2 notices, the reliefs sought for in the writ petition have become infructuous. 3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank, I am of the opinion that there is considerable merit in the contention taken by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the reliefs sought for in this writ petition have become infructuous as no sale pursuant to Exhibits P1 and P2 took place. The property of the petitioner was thereafter, brought to sale in the month of February-2026 and was purchased by the bank itself in auction.

Reserving the liberty of the petitioner to challenge the sale, if so advised, this writ petition will stand dismissed.