IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2008 / 17TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 146 of 2005(P) ------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------ V.K.KOCHU MUHAMMED, RAFI VILLA, ASHTAMACHIRA, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.B.JAYAPARAKASH SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE TAHSILDAR, NILAMBUR. ADDL. 3. PADMINI ALANGADAN, MELETHIL, ALANGADU P.O., NADAVATTOM, MALAPPURAM. ADDL. 4. ABDUL AMEER, SON OF MAMY, ALIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, NEAR VELLAMBRAM RAILWAY GATE, P.O. KARAD, VANDOOR VIA, MALAPPURAM. ADDL. R3 AND R4 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER ON I A 414/07 DATED 8.8.2008 R1 AND R2 BY G.P. SMT. SMITHA R4 BY ADVS. SRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED ASHROF SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SMT.SHEENA SAMUEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED NIL ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPOSNDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.11.2004 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR REVENUE AND LAW. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DRAFT DATED ;2.2.2005 IN FAVOUR OF THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO.146 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT Writ Petition is filed challenging recovery proceedings which led to sale of petitioner's property to fourth respondent. This Court while admitting the Writ Petition granted conditional stay against confirmation of sale on payment of Rs. 25,000/-. Again petitioner was ordered to pay a further sum of Rs. 25,000/- on 14.2.2005. According to counsel for fourth respondent, petitioner did not comply with interim orders of this Court and therefore sale was confirmed and transfer deed is executed in favour of the fourth respondent. In the circumstances, petitioner's challenge against recovery proceedings at this distance of time is not maintainable. W.P. is accordingly dismissed. Second respondent will forward the amount to the requisitioning authority, the Deputy Labour Commissioner and excess sale price over the debt amount and the amounts if any paid by the petitioner under interim orders of this Court should be refunded to the petitioner without any delay. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 2