IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2010 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 14214 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- THANKAPPAN, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.VASU, VADAKKEDAN HOUSE, VELUPPADAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.P.R.REENA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, IRINJALAKUDA. 2. N.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR, S/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, PALLATT HOUSE, ARIKUZHA P.O., MANAKKAD VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA. 3. P.INDIRA, W/O.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR, PALLATT HOUSE, ARIKUZHA P.O., MANAKKAD VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA. 4. R.JAYASREE MANOJ, W/O.K.MANOJ, J.S.MANDIRAM, VELLURKUNNAM VILLAGE, MOOVATTUPUZHA. 5. SAJEEVKUMAR, S/O.THANKAPPAN, VADAKKEDAN HOUSE, VELUPPADAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 14214 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging the recovery proceedings by way of Exts.P2 and P3 notices issued under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, in the name of the son of the petitioner, who was a respondent in OP(MV) 1714/2003 of the MACT, Moovattupuzha. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the son of the petitioner was the owner of a goods carriage, which however was sold by him years back and it was much thereafter that the said vehicle met with a road traffic accident, leading to the OP(MV) as aforesaid; where an Award was passed, mulcting the liability upon the son of the petitioner. It is stated that the son of the petitioner is now working in the 'Gulf' and that he does not have any property; whereas the respondents are threatening the petitioner of dire consequences on the strength of Exts.P2 and P3; which made the petitioner to approach this Court. It is also stated that the property, where the petitioner resides exclusively is owned by the petitioner and that the son of the petitioner has absolutely no rights over the same. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent submits that Exts.P2 and P3 are only notices under Section 7 and 34 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act issued in the name of the son 2 WP(C) No. 14214/2010 of the petitioner. It is pointed out before the Court that no steps are intended to be pursued against the petitioner or his properties. 4. In the above circumstance, this Court does not find it necessary to issue any notice to respondents 2 to 5. The submission made by the learned Government Pleader that Exts.P2 and P3 will not be acted upon against the petitioner and his properties is recorded and the Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc