IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN SATURDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2011 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 32246 of 2011(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- YESUDASAN, S/O. LATE JOSEPH, AGED 72 YEARS, MANJINEZHATHU THARAYIL VEEDU, SAKTHIKULANGARA CHERRY, SAKTHIKULANGARA VILLAGE, MARUTHADI P.O, KOLLAM- 691 003. BY ADV. SRI.ARUN.B.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DISTRICT COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM- 691 003. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(REVENUE RECOVERY), KOLLAM- 691 003. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S.JAMAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.32246/2011 E APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE AND DEMAND PRIOR TO THE ATTACHMENT OF LAND ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. P2: COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT TO THE POLICE. P3: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF THE UNNUMBERED CRIMINAL APPEAL OF 2011. P4: COPY OF THE CRL.M.P.NO.3079/11 IN CR.APPEAL NO...OF 2011. P5: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BEFORE THE SESSIONS COURT TO SUSPEND THE EXECUTION OF SENTENCE. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.32246 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner stood as a surety for an accused in a proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kollam. The accused did not appear before the Court on the date fixed for appearance. Therefore, the bail bond was cancelled and notices were issued to the sureties. The petitioner has been directed to pay the bond amount of Rs.50,000/-. The petitioner did not know about the same. Only when the recovery proceedings were initiated, the petitioner came to know about the proceedings. Therefore, the petitioner filed appeal against M.C.No.123/03 before the Sessions Court, Kollam. Since there is delay in filing the appeal, without condoning the delay, the Sessions Court will not entertain the stay application. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petitions seeking the following reliefs: “(1) To issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order calling for the records relating to Exhibit P1 and W.P.(C)No.32246/11 2 quash the same. (2) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the 2nd respondent to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P1, till a decision is taken by the Sessions Court Kollam on the appeal filed by the petitioner. (3) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the 1st respondent to direct the 2nd respondent to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P1, till a decision is taken by the Sessions Court Kollam on the appeal filed by the petitioner.” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The Sessions Court, Kollam shall consider and pass orders on the application to condone delay and stay application filed by the petitioner against M.C.No.123/2003, as expeditiously as possible. Till orders are thus passed, revenue recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance on condition that the petitioner pays Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) within two weeks. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.32246/11 3 W.P.(C)No.32246/11 4