IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2008 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 9991 of 2005(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SHAMLA SHERAFUDDIN, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O. LATE K.M.SHERAFUDDIN, KALLUMGAL HOUSE, KANJIRAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KANJIRAPPALLY. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) SPECIAL CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KOLLAM. 4. M.M.SYED MOHAMMED, CALTEX RUBBERS, KANJIRAPPALLY, BUILDING NO.K.P.VII/70 (R3) ROHINOOR BUILDING, K.K.ROAD, KANJIRAPPALLY, NEW NO.K.P.V/670 R1, WAVER BUILDING, KANJIRAPPALLY. R1 TO 3 BY G.P. SRI.K.P.PRADEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/04/2008, THE COURT ON 01/04/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DT.15.3.2005 ISSUED BY R1. P2: TRUE COPY OF DEMANDNOTICE DT.15.3.2005 ISSUED BEFORE ATTACHMENT OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES. P3: TRUE COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE DT.25.8.97 OF K.M.SHERAFUDDIN. P4: TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE UNDER THE KGST RULES. P5: .DO. CST RULES. P6: ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DT.20.10.2004 PASSED BY R2 AGAINST R4. P7: TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DT.6.1.2005 FILED BY R4 BEFORE R3. P8: TRUE COPY OF INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION DT.6.1.2005 FILED BY R4 FOR EARLY DISPOSAL OF P7 APPEAL. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.9991 of 2005 .................................................................... Dated this the 1st day of April, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of arrears due from a dealer for whom petitioner's husband stood as surety. The bond executed by the petitioner's husband was for Rs.3 lakhs. Therefore, recovery has to be limited to this amount. The W.P. is disposed of directing the first respondent to verify title deeds pertaining to the property held by the petitioner and to identify the properties devolved on death of the defaulter and to proceed against such properties. However, if petitioner's husband has transferred any property in favour of the petitioner which is hit by Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act or Section 44 of the Revenue Recovery Act or Section 26A of the KGST Act, the validity of such transaction should be considered by the first respondent and if such transaction is to evade recovery, then recovery can be proceed against such property after issuing orders to that effect. Liability of the petitioner after husband's death also will be considered by the first respondent and petitioner can raise whatever is the objection she has, before the first respondent for him to consider before proceeding with recovery. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms