IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2011 / 12TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21154 of 2011(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SHINDO VARGHESE, S/O.VARGHESE, AGED 35 YEARS, NEDUNGATTU HOUSE, CHELAD.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, KOTHAMANGALAM. 689642 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTHAMANGALAM. 689642 3. THE UNION BANK OF INDIA, KOTHAMANGALAM BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER. 689642 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 682030 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN BY ADV. SRI.A.S.P.KURUP, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 21154 of 2011(T) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ----------------------------------- EXT.P1. COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 28.06.2011 UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT ATTACHING THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT AND SERVED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DT. 28.06.2011 UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT AND SERVED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 27.107.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 72 OF THE KERALA REVENUE RECOVERY ACT, 1968 BEFORE TH DISTRICT COLLECTOR DATED 29.072011 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL ------------------------------------ / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 21154 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 3rd day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the revenue recovery proceedings initiated by the 3rd respondent through respondents 1, 2 and 4 for recovery of amounts due from the petitioner to the respondent. The petitioner has filed Ext.P4 petition before the 4th respondent under Section 72 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. Petitioner seeks a direction to the 4th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 expeditiously. 2. When it was pointed out to the learned counsel for the petitioner that the District Collector being a person entrusted with the task of recovery alone, he cannot deal with the dispute raised by the petitioner, which is that the recovery of debt is barred by limitation, and the petitioner's remedy lies in filing a suit against the 3rd respondent bank, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred under Section 72 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. I am of opinion that Section 72 bars the jurisdiction of the civil court in entertaining challenge against revenue recovery proceedings and it is certainly within the jurisdiction of the civil court to entertain the dispute between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent as to whether recovery of debt is barred by limitation. In fact only the civil court can decide that question and not the District Collector. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed W.P(C) No. 21154 of 2011 -: 2 :- without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file a suit against the 3rd respondent for injunction from proceeding against the petitioner for recovery of the debt on the ground that the debt is barred by limitation. I make it clear that I have not considered the contention of limitation raised by the petitioner on merits and it is for the appropriate civil court to consider the same on the basis of evidence to be adduced by the parties. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/