IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 31ST BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 29025 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABDUL GAFFAR, S/O.HAJI NOOR MOHAMAD SAIT AGED 54 YEARS, JEWEL SPARK NO.B 3, ERNAKULAM NORTH P.O., PIN-682018. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 682 030 2. THE TAHSILDAR (RR), KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682011. 3. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM. 682 011 4. MOHAMMED IRFAN, JEWELS PARK-B3, PROVIDENCE ROAD, ERNAKULAM-18. 5. T.A.RASHEED, THUNDAPARAMBIL HOUSE, 36/935, DESHABIMANI ROAD, KALOOR-17. 6. P.H.SHIBU, SHIBU MANZIL, 14/281, KARUVELIPADY, KOCHI-682005. 7. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX, CIRCLE-II, ERNAKULAM. 682 018 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------ WP(C) NO. 29025 OF 2010 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT Grievance of the petitioner is against the coercive steps being pursued against movable and immovable properties belonging to him, for recovery of arrears due from respondents 4 to 6. Fourth respondent is the son of the petitioner who had conducted some business in partnership with respondents 5 and 6. The impugned Revenue Recovery proceedings was initiated for realising arrears of sales tax due with respect to the said business. According to the petitioner, even though 4th respondent is residing with him the residential flat wherein the petitioner is staying belongs to him absolutely, and he holds title by virtue of Ext.P1. All the movables situated therein belongs to the petitioner, is the contention. Complaint is that, by virtue of Ext.P3 notice, the respondents are taking steps for attachment of the property belonging to the petitioner. It is also complained that the respondents 2 and 3 are also threatening attachment of movables situated within the house where the petitioner is residing. 2. The dispute basically pertains to claim of the petitioner upon the properties which are proceeded against under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. The Kerala Revenue Recovery Act provides effective remedy in such situations. The petitioner can approach the authority concerned raising such 2 WP(C) No. 29025/2010 claims, for release of attachment. This Writ Petition is filed without resorting to such remedies available to the petitioner. Hence I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be relegated to the authority concerned. 3. If the petitioner submits any claim petition with respect to proceedings initiated under Exts.P2 and P3 notices, objecting the actions proposed against the movable and immovable properties upon which he claims absolute right, situated at his place of residence, within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be adjudicated by the 2nd respondent, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. A decision thereof shall be taken at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such claim. 4. Till such time orders are passed on any such claim petition further steps of recovery against properties covered under Ext.P1 and the movables situated within the residential flat contained therein, shall be kept in abeyance. 5. It is made clear that the above directions will not stand in the way of the respondents 2 and 3 from proceeding against any of the properties of respondents 4 to 6, except the property covered under Ext.P1 document. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc