IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2009 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 36036 of 2008(M) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. R.ACHUTHAN NAIR, S/O. GOVINDA PILLAI, AGED 75 T.C. 9/758,SREE NILAYAM, SASTHAMANGALM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. S.LALITHAVATHY AMMA, W/O. R.ACHUTHAN NAIR, AGED 71, T.C. 9/758, SREE NILAYAM, SASTHAMANGALM, THIRUVANATHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE SRI.P.PRIJITH SRI.S.VAIDYANATHAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, VELLAYAMBALAM THIRUVANANTHAPURM. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY) KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033, 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KARUPOORU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, SASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, NEDUMANGAD VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. THE SUB REGISTRAR, OFFICE SASTHAMANGALAM P.O. SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WPC : 36036/08 8. THE SUB REGISTRAR, OFFICE NEDUMANGAD, P.O.NEDUMANGAD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU,SC,KERALA FINANCIAL CORPN. R2 TO R8 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC : 36036/08 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC:16280/08 DT.08.08.08. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 28.10.08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFOE THE RESPONDENTS. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF POSTAL ACKNOWLDEGMENT CARDS FOR RECEIPT OF EXT.P2. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 36036 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioners are guarantors for loan amounts availed from the 1st respondent Kerala Financial Corporation and they had mortgaged immovable properties belonging to them by deposit of title deeds as security for the loan amounts. Borrowers commit default in repayment of loan amounts. Respondents 1 and 2 initiated Revenue Recovery proceedings under Section 34 of the Revenue Recovery Act and attached the properties, by virtue of powers under Section 36 of the Revenue Recovery Act, which attachment has been registered with the appropriate Sub Registry office. Subsequently, the petitioners settled the loan account with the 1st respondent by availing of benefits under the one time settlement scheme applicable. Still the respondents did not return the title deeds, apparently on the ground that, collection charges are still due from the petitioners to the State. Petitioners approached this Court and obtained Ext.P1 judgment to the effect that they are not liable to pay collection charges insofar as they had paid the amounts directly to the Kerala Financial Corporation(KFC). Thereafter, the KFC returned the title WPC :36036/08 -:2:- deeds to the petitioners. The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that the attachment on the properties are still stand registered with the Sub Registry and Village Office and the village officers refuse to issue possession certificates and to accept basic tax in respect of their properties. It is under the above circumstances the petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “i. issue a writ of mandamus or other writ order or direction compelling the respondents 1 and 2 to communicate the order of lifting of attachments and release of charges of the properties of petitioners to respondents 4 to 8. ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or other writ order or direction compelling the respondents 4 to 8 to enter the lifting of attachments and release of charges of petitioners property as communicated by respondents 1 and 2 in revenue records and records maintained in Sub Registry Offices of respondents 4 to 8.” 2. The contention raised by the learned Government Pleader is that the State is proposing to file a writ appeal against Ext.P1 judgment and if attachment is released, it would be difficult for the State to recover the collection charges from the petitioners. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. Ext.P1 is dated 08.08.08. Even if the State files a writ appeal against the same, that can only be with a petition to condone delay. The WPC :36036/08 -:3:- petitioners cannot be asked to wait indefinitely to get the attachment lifted, on that ground. That being so, I do not think that the petitioners should be made to suffer on account of the attachment still standing entered in the revenue records. Even without the attachment, it would be open to the respondents to recover the same from the petitioners, if ultimately they succeed in the writ appeal. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: Respondents 3 to 8 shall take appropriate steps to see that the attachment of the petitioners' properties in revenue records are lifted and appropriate endorsements made in the registers of the Sub Registry as well as Village Office. The above exercise shall be taken up and completed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In the meanwhile, the concerned Village Officers shall accept land tax in respect of the properties and issue possession certificates to the petitioners, if they are otherwise entitled to the same without waiting to complete the said process. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ttb WPC :36036/08 -:4:-