IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2011 / 13TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 35490 of 2010(I) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ UDAYAKUMAR, S/O.NEELAKANDAN, AGED 38 YEARS, VALIATHU VEEDU, I MURI, VILANTHARA P.O., WEST KALLADA VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.DILEEP RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE MANAGER, K.S.F.E.LTD., ADOOR BRANCH, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 645. 2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHASILDAR (R.R.), THE K.S.F.E.LTD., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 001. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS , SC KSFE LTD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.35490 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Petitioner is challenging the revenue recovery proceedings initiated on the basis of Ext.P1 notice issued under Section 36 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968. The amount sought to be realised pertains to arrears in a chitty transaction subscribed by the petitioner from the 1st respondent. Complaint of the petitioner is that, inspite of approaches made, he was not served with proper statement of accounts or any notice of demand prior to initiation of proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act. It is also contended that amount of interest claimed is excessive and exorbitant. 2. In a statement filed on behalf of 1st respondent it is mentioned that the petitioner had subscribed a chitty having sala of Rs.2 lakhs, and he was prized with an amount of Rs.1,40,000/- on 10.7.2003. Subsequently the petitioner had committed default in payment of monthly subscriptions to the tune of Rs.34,000/-. After adjusting of the amounts due, there was arrear of Rs.32,390/- as on 12.6.2007 and inspite of repeated demands the petitioner had failed to make payment of the said amount. Hence steps under the Revenue Recovery Act was initiated. W.P.(C).35490/10 -2- 3. Considering the facts and circumstances I am of the view that none of the contentions raised in this writ petition deserve merit in order to hold that the petitioner is in no way liable for payment of the amount sought to be recovered. There is no legally tenable ground raised refuting liability of the petitioner. Hence I am of the view that the writ petition is devoid of any merits. 4. However, as a gesture of indulgence, when the writ petition came up for consideration, the coercive steps of recovery was stayed, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.10,000/-. It is reported that the amount has already been paid on 1.1.2011. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, having confronted with the above situation, appealed to this court to permit payment of the balance outstanding, in a phased manner. 6. Heard; standing counsel appearing for the 1st respondent. It is submitted that the account is in chronic default and the petitioner has not responded to any demands made earlier. However, considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to pay off the entire liability within a reasonable time, in instalments. 7. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps of W.P.(C).35490/10 -3- recovery, provided the petitioner remits the entire balance amount along with interest if any due, in 5 (five) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 15.1.2011 and on or before the 15th day of the succeeding months. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb