IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2011 / 31ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17489 of 2009(E) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- VIJAYAMMA W/O SOMANADHAN, THULAMUTTATH HOUSE, ATTUVATHALA MURI, CHHAMBAKKULAM VILLAGE, KUTTANAD THALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KUTTANADU, ALAPPUZHA. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, NEDUMUDI, ALAPPUZHA. 5. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. R1 TO 5 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2011, ALONG WITH WPC NO.7355 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 17489/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.427/1994. P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 39 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT. P3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN O.S. NO.423/1994 OF THE SUB COURT, ALAPPUZHA. P4: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R3(a):COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15/01/2009 IN A.S. NO.833/1997. R3(b):COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN R.S.A. NO.660/2004. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) Nos. 17489/2009 & 7355/2010 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 22nd day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioners in W.P(C) No. 7355/2010 are guarantors for repayment of certain amounts due from the husband of the 4th respondent, who is no more. W.P(C) No. 17489/2009 is filed by the 2nd petitioner in the other writ petition. The contention of the petitioners is that revenue recovery proceedings initiated for recovery of the amounts are not being completed expeditiously. At the same time, the basic tax due in respect of the 2nd petitioner's property is not being accepted on the ground of the attachment on their property for recovery of amounts due from the husband of the 4th respondent. 2. It is submitted before me that altogether six properties have been attached for recovery of the amount, out of which 4 properties belong to the 4th respondent and 2 belong to the petitioners. According to the petitioners, sale of even one of the four properties belonging to the principal debtor would be sufficient to recover the entire amount and it is not necessary to proceed against the petitioners' properties at all. At any rate, respondents 1 to 3 are bound to complete the recovery proceedings expeditiously, is the contention raised by the petitioners. 3. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. Although the 4th respondent is represented by counsel, nobody appears today. 4. I am of opinion that protracting of the revenue recovery W.P(C) Nos. 17489/2009 & 7355/2010 -: 2 :- proceedings indefinitely is unjust and unreasonable. In the above circumstances, these writ petitions are disposed of with the following directions: Respondents 1 to 3 shall complete the revenue recovery proceedings by first proceeding against the properties of the husband of the 4th respondent, which have devolved on her, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Only if the amounts realised from the properties of the principal debtor are not sufficient to cover the entire amounts due from the husband of the 4th respondent, the petitioners properties shall be proceeded against. After completing the proceedings as directed above, the Village Officer shall consider the application of the petitioners for accepting tax and pass orders thereon in accordance with law within a further period of one month therefrom. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/