IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2008 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1930 FAO.No. 137 of 2008() & I.A.No.2202/2008 --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 09/04/2008 IN IA 3689/2007 IN OS.452/2007 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF ----------------------------------------------- MARTIN, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 46 YEARS, PADAYATTY HOUSE, ANGAMALY KARA, ANGAMALY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS ----------------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., THRISSUR, REP. BY GENERAL MANAGER, K.S.F.E.LTD., MUSEUM ROAD, THRISSUR - 680 020. 2. K.S.F.E., LTD., ALUVA, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 3. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R), K.S.F.E.LTD., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SC, K.S.F.E.LTD. FOR R1 & R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.R.LAKSHMINARAYANAN THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ First Appeal No.137 of 2008 and I.A.No.2202/2008 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 11th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T P.R.RAMAN, J. Learned counsel, Sri.M.Sasindran accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Learned Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the third respondent. Service is complete. I.A.No.2202/2008 is allowed. 2. This is an appeal filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order in I.A.No.3689/2007 in original suit No.452/2007 before the Sub Court, North Paravur. The court below dismissed the application by a cryptic order stating that “after the amendment, civil court has no jurisdiction, till the other appropriate remedies are exhausted”. Nothing is stated as to why the suit is not maintainable. At any rate, the question as to whether the suit is maintainable or not will arise for consideration based on the pleadings between the parties during the trial. F.A.O.No.137 of 2008 and I.A.No.2202/2008 -: 2 :- 3. Prima facie we are not satisfied with the finding of the court below that the civil court has no jurisdiction. The suit is one for settlement of accounts. The question as to whether any amount is due from the plaintiff to the defendant cannot be adjudicated in the proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act. Necessarily, such dispute has to be adjudicated only by a civil court. In such circumstances, prima facie, the suit is maintainable. 4. Then the question is whether during the pendency of suit, revenue recovery proceedings is to be initiated. According to the defendants the amount sought to be recovered by revenue recovery proceedings is the balance amount after setting off the amounts, if any, due or payable to him. According to the plaintiff, the actual amount due and payable is only an amount of Rs.1,50,000/-. However, this is disputed by the respondents. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that if the appellant/plaintiff deposits an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh and fifty thousand only), before the court below within a period of one month, further proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act will stand stayed till final disposal of the F.A.O.No.137 of 2008 and I.A.No.2202/2008 -: 3 :- suit. The deposited amount is permitted to be withdrawn by the respondents. The court below shall dispose of the suit if the pre- trial stages are completed, expeditiously and at any rate within six months. The first appeal from order is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, Judge T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Judge ms