IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2011 / 7TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 796 of 2011(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- V.P. RAJAN, S/O.KUTTY, AGED 53 YEARS, V.P.R. FOODS AND SPICES INDUSTRIES, RAJAKKAD, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.JOSHI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, RAJAKKAD VILLAGE OFFICE, RAJAKKAD, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 685 566. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KANTHIPPARA VILLAGE OFFICE, KANTHIPPARA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 685 566. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.BIJOY CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.796 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The petitioner was the accused in C.C.No.414/02 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam, which is a complaint filed for offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is stated that the matter was settled and the complainant had withdrawn the case. But during pendency of the proceedings before the CJM Court, the petitioner failed to appear and on that basis M.C.23/07 was registered. The surety bond was forfeited and fine was imposed against the petitioner and other sureties to the tune of Rs.10,000/- each. At present recovery steps was initiated for realising the fine amount on the basis of the revenue recovery requisition issued by that court. The petitioner is approaching this court seeking to restrain the recovery steps. 2. During pendency of this writ petition it is stated that the petitioner had filed appeal against the order imposing fine, as Crl.A.No. 28/2011 before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam. It is stated that the said appeal was filed W.P.(C).796/11 -2- along with a delay condonation application, which is posted on 28.2.2011. Under the above circumstances, limited prayer made by the counsel appearing for the petitioner is only to keep in abeyance the recovery steps for a short period in order to facilitate the petitioner to seek appropriate relief in the appeal and in the accompanying applications already filed. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all recovery steps for a reasonable period. 4. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of restraining the respondents from proceeding with any further steps of recovery for realising the amounts covered under the order in M.C.23/07, for a period of two months, in order to facilitate the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy from the appellate court. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb