IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2008 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 31553 of 2006(F) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. ABRAHAM JACOB @ RAJAN, S/O.CHACKO, SINDIA ELECTRICALS, K.K.ROAD, KOTTAYAM. 2. ABHILASH.T.R., S/O.P.K.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, THUSHARANJILI, VELLOOR POST, KOTTAYAM. 3. SURESH KUMAR.P.R., S/O.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, PHOTO WORLD, NIDHIRI BUILDING, K.K.ROAD, KOTTAYAM. 4. JACOB KURIAN, S/O.KURIAN, HOTEL AMBASSADOR, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN, ADV. SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THOMAS J.NIDHIRI, S/O.JOHN, NIDHIRI HOUSE, MANNAKKANADU KARA, KURICHITHANAM VILLAGE, KURAVILANGADU. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR (RR), KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA, ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR), ADV. SMT.A.A.GEETHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/03/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.31553/2006-F: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD. 09/12/2003 EXECUTED BY SHEEBA JOHN IN FAVOUR OF THE P.2. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 29/03/2004 BY THE RECOVERY OFFICER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE R.2. DTD. 12/07/2005. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY PETITIONERS 1 TO 3 DTD. 20/07/2005. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION FILED BY THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR) KOTTAYAM DTD. 06/03/2006. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 18/11/2006 ISSUED BY THE R.3. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.31553 OF 2006 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioners are tenants of a defaulter of abkari dues. Revenue recovery proceedings were initiated and action has been taken in terms of the Abkari Act and Rules. Any statute, like the Kerala Buildings (lease and rent control) Act, 1965 Act 2 of 1965 which governs the rights to landlords and tenants, cannot have an overriding effect on the priorities and rights of State to recover amounts due to it. Under such circumstances, the plea of the petitioner that they are entitled to the protection of the Rent Act is unsustainable. The writ petition fails. The same is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.