IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2011 / 30TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 22139 of 2010(N) --------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. PADMINI, AGED 57 YEARS, W/O.LATE PEETHAMBARAN, PALIYATH HOUSE, AMBALLUR. 2. SREEKANTH, S/O.LATE PEETHAMBARAN, PALIYATH HOUSE, AMBALLUR. BY ADVS. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.R.RAJITHA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. MANAGER, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., OPP.TOWN HALL, IRINJALAKUDA-680021. 2. SENIOR MANAGER (R.R), KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., MUSEUM ROAD, THRISSUR- 680020. 3. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R.), KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., THRISSUR - 680020. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR- 680020. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.NAVEEN, SC, K.S.F.E. LTD. R3 & R4 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 22139 of 2010(N) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 2.1.2007. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION TO THE CHAIRMAN, KSFE, THRISSUR SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.2.2007 ISSUED BY FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE STATEMENT ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 3874/09 DATED 19.3.2009 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT SUBMITTED BY FIRST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. EXT.P8 : COPY OF THE REPLY TO EXHIBIT-P7 STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FILED BY PETITIONERS. EXT.P9 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.5.2010 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. EXT.P10 : COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 29.6.2010 ISSUED BY THIRD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.22139 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- This writ petition is filed challenging the revenue recovery steps initiated, at the behest of respondents 1 and 2, to realise amounts due under a chitty transaction subscribed by the late husband of the petitioner, who was the father of the 2nd petitioner. Main contentions raised is that, inspite of the chitty being prized in favour of the deceased subscriber, the amount was not released, since he could not furnish proper security. Under such circumstances, respondents 1 and 2 were at an obligation to deposit the prize money in an interest bearing account and ought to have appropriated the arrears due in the chitty transaction out of the amounts accruing in such deposit. Since such proper appropriation of the prize money was not done in the case at hand, the balance amount demanded and sought to be recovered, is not true and correct, is the contention. 2. It is noticed that, when the recovery steps was initiated, the petitioners have approached this court, on an earlier occasion. In Ext.P5 judgment this court declined to entertain the writ petition. However, liberty was reserved to W.P.(C).22139/10 -2- the petitioner to agitate the matter before the appropriate forum. It is noticed that the petitioner had submitted Ext.P8 dispute before the District Collector, the 4th respondent herein. However, the 4th respondent had issued Ext.P9 reply declining any action observing that the amount sought to be recovered is due under the provisions of the Kerala Chitties Act and hence such dispute could not be entertained. On the basis of Ext.P9, further recovery steps were pursued by the 3rd respondent, on issuing Ext.P10 notice. Hence aggrieved by Ext.P8 and P10 this writ petition was filed. 3. In a statement filed by the counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 it is mentioned that the respondents 1 and 2 are liable to pay the prize amount only if the subscriber furnishes proper security. On the other hand the prize amount is liable to be deposited in any approved Bank, in terms of the conditions stipulated in the “Variola”. It is further stated that in the case at hand the deposit of the prize money was made in “Sugama Account” (savings account) maintained by the KSFE and the interest accrued @ 5% was given credit while calculating the defaulted amounts. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, the recovery steps were initiated in a totally illegal and irregular manner. Neither the deceased subscriber W.P.(C).22139/10 -3- nor the petitioner was given any proper notice regarding the balance outstanding and no copy of the statement of accounts showing credit of any such interest was furnished to them. 5. On the other hand, Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 had pointed out that Ext.P7 produced along with the writ petition itself will show that such statement of account was furnished and it is evident from the said statement of account that all payments as well as interests accrued were given proper credit. It is stated that Ext.P7 was furnished by respondents 1 and 2 before the District Collector. In this regard the petitioner had filed a reply affidavit in which the contentions raised in the statement was refuted. According to the petitioner, there was no proper adjudication conducted by respondents 1 and 2 before proceeding with steps for recovery. Further it is pointed out that the petitioners being legal heirs of the deceased defaulter, have not been issued with any notice before initiating the recovery steps. 6. Under the above mentioned circumstances I am of the view that it is only just and proper to provide the petitioners a further opportunity to approach the 2nd respondent seeking clarification regarding appropriation of the amounts and also regarding calculation of the amounts outstanding as balance to be recovered. Therefore, the petitioners are given liberty to W.P.(C).22139/10 -4- approach the 2nd respondent with a proper representation, which is to be filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If any such representation is received, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and take a decision thereof after affording an opportunity of hearing to the first petitioner at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. 7. Till such time a decision is taken by the 2nd respondent as directed above, further steps of recovery shall be kept in abeyance provided the petitioner remits a sum of Rs.25,000/- within a period of three weeks from today. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb