IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 33146 of 2009(K) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- RETNAKUMARYAMMA, AGED 61 YEARS, D/O.LATE BHAVNI AMMA, ANOOP NIVAS(MANAMEL VEEDU), PADANADU PADIJATTAM MURI, PADANADU VILLAGE,CHENGANNUR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.AJITH MURALI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, CHENGANNUR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PADANADU VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI . BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 33146 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. Petitioner's son is an accused in a criminal case which is pending trial before the Assistant Sessions Court, Chengannur. Since the petitioner's son is absconding, the court initiated proceedings against the sureties and fine was imposed in M.C No.11/2008 in S.C. No.515/2008. According to the petitioner the sureties have remitted the fine as evidenced by Ext.P1. Proclamation warrant is pending against the petitioner's son as evidenced by Ext.P2. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that in pursuance of steps initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act for realisation of the fine amount due from the petitioner's son, the 2nd respondent has now proceeded against movables and immovables of the petitioner. Contention of the petitioner is that the properties belongs to the petitioner and they are not liable to be proceed against, for realisation of any amount due from her son. W.P.(C)No. 33146 of 2009 -2- 3. It is evident from Ext.P5 that the said notice is issued only in the name of the petitioner's son. As such no notice is issued against the petitioner intimating any recovery steps. With respect to the property of the petitioner there is no basis for any apprehension that it will be proceeded in pursuance of recovery of amounts due from her son. 4. However, it is made clear that if any such action is attempted to be proceeded against the properties of the petitioner, she will be at liberty to object such action. The 2nd respondent shall not proceed with any coercive steps against properties belonging to the petitioner, without considering and disposing of objections if any raised by the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE shg/