IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2010 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 37401 of 2007(C) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- KOSAMATTOM FINANCE(P)LTD., (FORMERLY KOSAMATTOM BANKERS), THEKKEKARAYAN TOWERS, KANJIKUZHI, MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MATHEW K.CHERIAN. BY ADV. SRI.R.RAMADAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2010, ALONG WITH WPC. NO.7646 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.37401/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 23.2.2007 IMPOSNG PENALTY FOR THE YEAR 2002-2003 TO 2004-2005 OF KUMBANAD BRANCH. P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER YEAR 2003-2004 TO 2004-05 OF PATHANAMTHITTA BRANCH. P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2003-2004 TO 2004-05 OF KOZHENCHERRY BRANCH. P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2003-2004 TO 2004-05 OF PANDALAM BRANCH. P5:- COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DTD.3.4.07 BEFORE THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE EYAR 2002-03 TO 2004-05. P6:- -DO- FOR THE YEAR 2003-04 TO 2004-05. P7:- -DO- FOR THE YEAR 2003-04 TO 2004-05. P8:- -DO- FOR THE YEAR 2003- 04 TO 2004-05. P9:- COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE DTD. 21.11.2007 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P10:- COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DTD. 2.3.07 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WA. NO.564/2007. P11:- COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DTD. 3.7.07 IN W.A. 564/2007. P12:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 25.10.2007 IN WP(C) NO.31739/2007. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) Nos. 37401 of 2007 & 7646 of 2008 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 28th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging the correctness and sustainability of the recovery proceedings being pursued at the instance of the respondents, resorting to the remedy available under the relevant provisions of Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, in respect of the realization of the alleged penalty under Section 18 (C) of the Kerala Money Lenders Act. 2. The case of the petitioner in both the cases is that, the petitioner is a non banking financial institution having been registered under the Companies Act and the relevant provisions under the R.B.I. Act, who is not supposed to take out any registration under the Kerala Money Lenders Act. However, without any regard to the actual facts and relevant provisions of law, proceedings were taken against the petitioners to recover penalty, which made the petitioner to approach this Court earlier by filing W.P. (C) No. 8202 of 2005, which was finally dismissed. It was challenged by the petitioner in Writ Appeal No. 564 of 2007. Eventhough, the coercive proceedings were intercepted by way of interim order, the Writ Appeal also happened to be dismissed later. The matter has been taken up further by filing SLP (with regard to the applicability of Kerala Money Lenders Act), W.P. (C) Nos. 37401 of 2007 & 7646 of 2008 2 which has been admitted and interim order of stay has obtained in this regard. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, challenging the impugned orders passed by the concerned authorities (Exts. P1 to P4 in W.P. (C) No. 37401 of 2007 and Exts. P1 and P2 in other case), the petitioner has preferred revision petitions (Exts. P5 to P8 in the former case and Exts. P3 and P4 in the latter case), which are stated as pending consideration before the second respondent.. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds it fit and proper to direct the second respondent to consider and finalize the revision petitions preferred by the petitioner in both the cases, in accordance with law, within a specified time. Accordingly, the second respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders in the above revision petitions, in accordance with law, of course after giving an opportunity of hearing, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is also made clear that, the recovery proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till final orders are passed in the above revision petitions. Both the writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd