IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2010 / 15TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 12739 of 2010(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- A.K.SURESH KUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, POLYCHEM FORMULATIONS, KAVANOOR.P.O, AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR. P.VENUGOPAL (1086/92) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SHAJESH KUMAR.P, S/O.P.GOPALAN, SHARON NIKETH, MUNDUPARAMBU-P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. TAHSILDAR, ERNAD TALUK, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. * 4. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK LIMITED, MALAPPURAM BRANCH, MALAPPURAM - REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER (* impleaded as additional 4th respondent as per order dated 27.4.2010 in I.A. 5640 of 2010) R1 BY ADV. MR. R.RAJESH KORMATH R2 & 3 SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKAL ADDL. R4 BY ADV. MR. C.AJITH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/07/2010, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 12750 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP © 12739 OF 2010 APPENDIX EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE INVOICE ISSUED BY THE BEST INDIA COMPUTER SHOPPE MALAPPURAM ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 30.3.2010 EXT. P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 6.4.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT. P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT ON 6.4.2010 FOR HAVING RECEIVED EXT. P3 PETITION. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) Nos. 12739 of 2010 and 12750 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 6th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners in both the cases are aggrieved of the steps taken by the respondents, resorting the remedy under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, for realization of the amount allegedly due from the first respondent to the additional 4th respondent Bank, under a loan transaction. The grievance is mainly with regard to the attachment of movables; in the first case i.e. W.P(C) No. 12739 of 2010, it is a 'Lap Top', while in the other case, it is a 'Motorcycle'. 2. Case of the petitioner in the former case is that, the 'lap top' belonging to the petitioner was wrongly attached by the concerned respondent on 27.3.2010, for realization of the due amount from the first respondent. The petitioner contends that the 'lap top' was entrusted to the first respondent, who is an employee of the petitioner's establishment, for conducting some demonstration at the doors of the prospective customers. It is stated that, the said 'lap top' was purchased by the petitioner as per Ext.P1 invoice dated 17.11.2008 (the original of which has been subsequently produced along with a memo). The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the respondents are not justified in proceeding against the said item and in W.P. (C) Nos. 12739 & 12750 of 2010 : 2 : spite of bringing the correct factual position by filing Exts. P2 and P3 representations before the second and third respondents, they have not been properly considered or finalized, which made the petitioner to approach this Court for appropriate relief. 3. In the latter case, it is contended that, the 'motorcycle' bearing No. KL10 G 8889; which originally belonged to the first respondent, was purchased by the petitioner on the basis of Ext. P1 sale agreement (the original of which was subsequently produced) and necessary arrangements were about to be made to cause the entries to be effected with regard to the change of ownership, before the authorities of the Motor Vehicles Department and it was within the 'grace period', that the same was attached by the revenue authorities, from the residential premises of the first respondent. The circumstance under which the vehicle happened to be at the doors of the first respondent is sought to be explained by the petitioner in the representation preferred by him before the concerned revenue authorities. Here also, the grievance is that, in spite of producing Ext.P1 and filing Ext. P3 representation before the 3rd respondent, the matter is still to be considered and finalized, which hence is under challenge in the Writ Petition. 4. The learned counsel for the first respondent submits that, the loan was actually availed by the wife of the first respondent from the W.P. (C) Nos. 12739 & 12750 of 2010 : 3 : Bank and that he was a surety to the said transaction. Subsequently, there was some estrangement between the petitioner and his wife and she is now living elsewhere. Referring to the contents of paragraph 2 of the counter affidavit, the learned counsel for the first respondent submits that, the said respondent and his wife have jointly purchased 4 cents of land in Survey No. 601/1 of Malappuram village and constructed a house therein with equal rights and that the first respondent does not have any objection in proceeding against the said property and building for realization the amounts due from the first respondent and his wife. It is also stated that, the wife of the first respondent has also given an intimation to the additional 4th respondent Bank that, she is not having any objection in this regard. The learned counsel also placed a copy of the 'e-mail', stated as sent by the wife of the first respondent to the Bank on 5.12.2008 in this regard. 5. This Court does not find it necessary of go into the merits of the case, but for directing the 3rd respondent/Collector to consider and finalize Ext.P3 representation in both the cases, in accordance with law, after hearing all concerned, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 'six' weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The parties are at liberty to produce all the relevant documents before the 3rd respondent to substantiate their contentions. W.P. (C) Nos. 12739 & 12750 of 2010 : 4 : The 'originals' of Ext.P1 produced in both the cases shall stand returned to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Both the Writ Petitions are disposed of. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd