IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 15TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27595 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- 1. ANNAKUTTY, W/O.LATE CHAKKAPPAN, MECHERY HOUSE, KIYHAKKUMMURI, KORATTY, MUKUNDAPURAM,THRISSUR. 2. GEORGE,S/O.LATE CHAKKAPPAN, MECHERY HOUSE KIYHAKKUMMURI, KORATTY,MUKUNDAPURAM,THRISSUR. 3. LISSY,D/O.LATE CHAKKAPPAN, MECHERY HOUSE, KIYHAKKUMMURI, KORATTY, MUKUNDAPURAM,THRISSUR. BY ADVS. SRI. K.A. SREEJITH SRI. JOS MECHERY RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680001. 2. TAHSILDAR, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, IRINJALAKUDA,THRISSUR-680121. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, MELOOR VILLAGE, MELOOR, THRISSUR - 680001. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, KORATTY THEKKUMMURY VILLAGE, KORATTY,THRISSUR-680664. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 27595 OF 2010 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioners are aggrieved by the revenue recovery steps initiated pursuant to Ext.P2 notice. The amounts sought to be recovered pertains to fine imposed in a criminal case against the deceased husband or the first petitioner, who is the father of the petitioners 2 and 3. The accused died on 15-04-2008, during pendency of Criminal Appeal No.1797/2003 before this Court. In Ext.P1 judgment this Court observed that due to death of the accused the appeal stands abated in so far as it relates to sentence to imprisonment. It is made clear that with respect to the sentence of fine, the same can be recovered from the assets belonging to the accused which is in the hands of his legal heirs. Petitioners are admittedly the legal heirs of the deceased accused. 2. Contention of the petitioners is that the respondents are now taking coercive steps against 2 WP(C) No. 27595/2010 movables and immovables belonging to the petitioners, whereas recovery can be pursued only against properties of the deceased, which if any inherited to the petitioners. When the personal properties of the petitioners were proceeded against, they submitted Ext.P3 objection before the first respondent, with a copy thereof endorsed to the 3rd respondent. Grievance of the petitioners is that without conducting any adjudication and without taking any decision on the objections, coercive steps are now being threatened for attachment and sale of the movables belonging to the petitioners. 3. It is evident that the liability can be enforced only against movables or immovable properties belonging to the deceased accused. Since the specific contention of the petitioners is that the properties now being proceeded against belongs to them personally, it is a matter which requires adjudication and decision. 4. Hence the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3 WP(C) No. 27595/2010 second respondent, before whom the petitioner will produce a copy of Ext.P3 objection, to consider Ext.P3, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and to take a decision thereon at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. Further proceedings against properties belonging to the petitioners can be pursued only subject to decision of the second respondent. However, it is made clear that this will not precluded the respondents from taking steps against immovable property if any belonging to the deceased predecessor in interest of the petitioners. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc