IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2008 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1930 WA.No. 860 of 2008() ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.9226/2008 Dated 24/03/2008 .................... APPELLANT: 5TH RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------- SOORANAD GRAMA VIKASANA SOCIETY, REG.NO.Q.46/96, SOORANAD NORTH, SOORANAD P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPINATH MENON RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.P. ANIL KUMAR, S/O. PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, AGED 39 YEARS, KAVIL VEEDU, THRUTHIKKARA MURI, KUNNATHUR VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, KERALA KHADI GRAMA VYAVASAYA BOARD, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE PROJECT OFFICER, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD,KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.MEERA - R2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A. No. 860 of 2008 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of June, 2008 Judgment Koshy,J. In the impugned order, there is a direction to the first respondent to immediately arrange for sale of 1.89 acres of land mortgaged by the society for recovery of arrears. Contention of the appellant is that the appellant was not heard while passing such an order even though they are the owners of 1.89 acres of land directed to be sold and that the society represented by its President who is the father of the petitioner has filed a writ petition questioning the proceedings by filing W.P.(C) No.24940/2006. In the above case, stay was granted as early as on 20.11.2006 as follows: "The petitioner claims various reliefs in relation to the amount demanded by the Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board. If these reliefs are granted, the total amount demanded may be reduced to certain extent. But, the petitioner has not paid any penny after availing the loan, going by the materials produced in the writ petition. So, even assuming substantial relief is liable to be extended to the petitioner, still, it will be liable to pay more than 50% of the amount demanded. The petitioner may pay 50% of the amount demanded within one month from today. If the said amount is not paid, W.A.No. 860/2008 2 revenue recovery steps can continue. Post after one month." It is submitted that there is a specific order to continue the revenue recovery proceedings if at least 50% of the amount is not paid. It is submitted by the contesting respondents that the conditional order was not stayed. In the above circumstances, we are not inclined to stay the interim order. However, the petitioner may approach the learned single Judge for disposal of the writ petition along with W.P. (C) No.24940 of 2006 at the earliest. The writ appeal is disposed of. J.B.Koshy Judge P.N.Ravindran Judge vaa W.A.No. 860/2008 3 J.B. KOSHY AND P.N.RAVINDRAN,JJ. ------------------------------------- W.A. No. 860 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Judgment Dated:5th June, 2008