IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2008 / 23RD SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 10138 of 2005(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.RAVINDRAN NAIR, S/O.N.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, MANGALA MADOM, NOERTH FORT GATE, TRIPUNITHURA P.O., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, NADAMA VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADDL. RESPONDENT: 3. SHRI.V.K.GODA VARMA RAJA, S/O.LATE KUMARAN POTTI, MANGALALAYAM PALACE, FORT TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM. (ADDL. RESPONDENT WHO IS THE BENEFICIARY AND COMPLAINANT BEFORE THE MAGISTRATE COURT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.24.8.05 IN THE W.P.(C)) R1&2 BY G.P. SMT.SMITHA SUKUMARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT.20.10.2004 IN C.C.82/1999 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM. P2: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DT.18.2.05 BY R1. P3: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DT.17.3.05 BY R2. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.10138 of 2005 .................................................................... Dated this the 14th day of August, 2008. JUDGMENT The question raised is whether revenue recovery can be continued against the petitioner for recovery of amount due under the Criminal Court order convicting him for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Even though this court made the complainant namely, the beneficiary of the judgment as a respondent in this W.P., notice could not be served because petitioner did not furnish the correct address. Government Pleader submitted that compensation imposed by the Criminal Court along with fine could be recovered in recovery proceedings by virtue of decision of this court. The petitioner has not produced copy of the judgment of the Criminal Court for this court to examine whether amount sought to be recovered is only fine or atleast in substance whether it is compensation. In the absence of the order based on which recovery is continued, this court cannot decide the matter. If petitioner pleads want of means for payment, then I do not know what is the grievance petitioner can have against recovery proceedings because if he has no assets, recovery also is not possible. In any case since judgment of the Criminal Court is 2 not produced in court, the W.P. is closed leaving freedom to the petitioner to raise objection against recovery before the first respondent for him to decide the same before proceeding for recovery. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms