IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2011 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 8838 of 2011(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SEBASTIAN KURIAKOSE,THAZHAKKAL HOUSE, ELAMPALLY PO, ANIKKAD, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.K.T.SHAJI SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION,BRANCH OFFICE,M.C.ROAD, KOTTAYAM 686 001. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(REVENUE RECOVERY) KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, KOTTAYAM 686 001. R1 TO R2 BY ADV: SRI. A.A. ABUL HASSAN R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER: SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SM C.K.ABDULREHIM,J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No. 8838 OF 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 22th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT The question pertains to realisation of collection charges under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. A Division Bench of this court in Malabar Organics Ltd Vs.State of Kerala(2009 (4) KLT 328)held that the defaulter may not be liable for payment of collection charges if the arrears is paid directly to the requisitioning authority and in case where no amount is recovered through any steps taken under the revenue recovery proceedings. However,learned Government pleader pointed out that the above decision is under challenge before the Honorable Supreme Court and the SLP filed in this regard as already been admitted and the operation of the judgment is stayed. 2. However in view of the legal position now stands settled I am of the view that the petitioner could not be deprived of his right to pursue consequential steps on the W.P.(C). No. 8838 OF 2011 2- basis of the closing of the arrears due to respondents 1 and 2, pending finalisation of the legal position by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hence interest of justice will be served if respondents 1 and 2 are directed to release the mortgage subject to liability of the petitioner for payment of collection charges depending of the out come of the matter which is now pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to close the loan amount and to release the mortgage and further to return the title deeds, if the petitioner makes payment of the entire amount due, other than the collection charges. The petitioner will file an undertaking before the respondents to the effect that he will make payment of the collection charges due if ultimately the legal position is settled .Needfull shall be done in this regard by the respondents 1 and 2 immediately after payment of the entire amount. (C.K.ABDULREHIM, JUDGE) W.P.(C). No. 8838 OF 2011 3- jkk