IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2010 / 21TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 785 of 2010(W) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- JAIMON, S/O.JAMES, AGED 34 YEARS, THOTTUPURAM VEEDU, VYTTILA DESOM, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.DIVAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. TAHASILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, KANAYANNOOR TALUK OFFICE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KVAT, CIRCLE I, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. M.J.LOUIS, MALIYAKKAL HOUSE, THEKKUMBHAGAM, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 785 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated, this the 11th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved of Ext.P11 order passed by the 3rd respondent, whereby the title deed executed by the vendor (Sale Deed 6167/2005 of the SRO, Tripunithura) has been set aside, as hit by the statutory prescription under Section 44 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser of the property in question and that the said property is in no way liable to be proceeded against, in respect of the amounts due from the 5th respondent, who was the actual defaulter, as to the sales tax arrears. It is also the case of the petitioner that, on the strength of the title deed, the petitioner has obtained a loan from the Kanayannur Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank creating equitable mortgage over the property in question and that much amount is liable to be repaid to the Bank. 3. The learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that the petitioner is very much having a statutory remedy as provided under Section 83(1) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act by WP(C) No.785/2010 2 filing a Revision Petition before the Commissioner, Land Revenue, Thiruvananthapuram. 4. In the above circumstance, the petitioner is free to proceed with such statutory remedy, if he so desires and if any such proceedings are filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the same shall be considered and finalised in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. So as to enable the petitioner to pursue such exercise, all coercive proceedings now stated as being pursued against him shall be kept in abeyance for a period of one month. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc