IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2009 / 7TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 93 of 2009(J) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- M/S. TRICOTT MULS LTD., NATTIKA, TRICHUR-680566,REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, C.RAJAN MENON REP. BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, DILEEP R.VARMA. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR 2. THE TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR 4. SRI.RAVINDRANATHAN ERANEZHATH VENGALI HOUSE, PERINGOTTUKAR THRISSUR. 5. M.S.SUBRAMANIAN, MELVEETTIL HOUSE, P.O.VADAKKUMURI, CHAMMAPILLY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN. ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR FOR R4 SMT.P.A.ANITHA FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC. 93/2009. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT. P1 : THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER IN GV 19/99 DATED 27.5.1999. EXT. P2 : THE PHOTO COPY OF THE WP(C) 24743/03 DATED 16.8.2003. EXT. P3 : THE PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.10.2003. EXT. P4 : THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.8.2004 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER FOR LAND REVENUE. EXT. P5 : THE PHOTO COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT. P6 : THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE WP. NO.21992 OF 2005 DATED 24.2.2005. EXT. P7 : THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE WRIT PETITION NO.26787 OF 2008 DATED 29.11.2007. EXT. P8 : THE PHOTOCPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT. P9 : THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1-15000/03 (1) DATED 12.10.2008. K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No.93 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P9. By Ext.P9 the sale of the property of the petitioner under the Revenue Recovery Act in favour of the fourth respondent was confirmed. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent and the learned Government Pleader. There is no appearance for the fifth respondent. 3. I feel that the petitioner has a remedy under Section 83 of the Revenue Recovery Act. Accordingly, the petitioner is relegated to avail the remedy under Section 83(1) of the Revenue Recovery Act. In order to avail the remedy, the interim order passed by this court will continue for a period of one month from today. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb