IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2009 / 4TH BHADRA 1931 W.A.No. 1354 of 2009 ---------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.19130/2007 Dated 19/03/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS IN THE WP -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, CHERTHALA TALUK OFFICE, CHERTHALA SUB DISTRICT, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. VILLAGE OFFICER, CHERTHALA SOUTH, CHERTHALA SUB DISTRICT, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, VAYALAR EAST, CHERTHALA SUB DISTRICT, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS IN THE WP --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.J.DENNIS, S/O.JACOB, COCODALE, M.O.WARD, ALLEPPEY, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY, SUDDEESH DINAKARAN, SUDHEEPAM, PUNNAPARA P.O., ALLEPPEY. 2. ANOOP S.R., S/O.P.SIVADASAN, KOIPURAM, KADAVANTHRA P.O., ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY, SUDDEESH DINAKARAN, SUDHEEPAM, PUNNAPARA P.O., ALLEPPEY. Addl. R3. THE BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA ALAPPUZHA (Is impleaded as additional respondent no.3 as per order dated 2-7-09) Addl.R4. THE RECOVERY OFFICER DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM (is impleaded as additional respondent no.4 as per order dated 13-8-2009) ADV. SMT.JAYASREE MANOJ SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH FOR ADDL R3 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.BANNURMATH, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No.1354 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of August 2009 JUDGMENT A.K.BASHEER, J. State of Kerala through its revenue officials has filed this appeal against the judgment in Writ Petition No.19130/07. By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has directed appellant No.1, the Tahsildar, Cherthala Taluk Office, Alappuzha district to carry out mutation in respect of the village records as provided under Rule 3(b), 8, 9 and 10 of the Transfer of Registry Rules, 1966 and to effect change in the Thandaper in respect of properties covered by Exts.P1 and P2 in the respective names of the petitioners. While issuing the above direction, the learned Single Judge had quashed Exts.P3 and P4 orders issued by appellant No.2. 2. The essential facts which are necessary for disposal of this case may be briefly noticed. 3. Respondents/petitioners herein were the successful bidders in the auction sale conducted by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam on October 28, 2005. Respondent No.1 purchased a property having an extent of 90 cents situated in Survey No.307/IA/3 of Cherthala South Village for Rs.45,20,000/-. Respondent no.2 purchased the other item of property having an extent of 60 cents situated in Survey No.227/10 of Vayalar East W.A.No.1354 OF 2009 :: 2 :: Village along with residential building and improvements thereon with six cents of land in survey No.227/8C and 227/8D of the same village for an amount of Rs.30,50,000/-. It is beyond controversy that respondents/auction purchasers had deposited the entire purchase money of Rs.75,70,000/- before the recovery officer immediately after the sale. 4. However, the respondents were constrained to approach this court, since the revenue authorities/appellants refused to effect mutation in the relevant records in respect of their properties on the ground that certain dues were payable by the judgment debtor to the State towards sales tax and abkari arrears. Learned Judge held that going by the relevant rules in the Transfer of Registry Rules, 1966 the objection raised by the revenue authorities was wholly untenable. 5. While assailing the judgment of the learned Single Judge, several contentions have been raised by the learned Government Pleader to which we do not propose to refer at this stage in view of the consensus arrived at by the learned counsel for the parties before us. 6. Sri.Surendranath, learned counsel for the State Bank of India, which has been impleaded as additional respondent No.3 points out that approximately a sum of Rs.1.24 crores is due from the judgment debtor to the Bank. Though the learned counsel agrees that sales tax dues would get preference, he has some reservations about the dues receivable by the W.A.No.1354 OF 2009 :: 3 :: State towards abkari dues. Anyhow, he submits that even assuming the State adjusts the dues payable under the two heads, the balance amount may be released to the bank for the time being. 7. Smt.Meera, learned Government Pleader points out that the Government has already received a sum of Rs.12,74,782/- from the amount in deposit with the Recovery officer towards sales tax dues. What remains is a sum of Rs.43,53,847/- towards abkari dues. 8. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the matter can be given a quietus for the time being. Therefore, the recovery officer, additional respondent No.4 herein is directed to release a sum of Rs.19,42,571/- to respondent No.3. The balance sum of Rs.43,53,947/- shall be retained by the recovery officer for the time being in the non lien account subject to the decision in appeal No.27/09 pending on the file of the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. 9. Learned Government Pleader submits that appellants have no objection in carrying out the directions issued by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment in view of the intervening development. It is brought to our notice that pursuant to an interim order issued by this court on 13/8/09, mutation has already been effected in favour of respondents 1 and 2. She submits that the appellants shall issue possession certificate and non attachment certificate to the respondents 1 and 2 within two weeks W.A.No.1354 OF 2009 :: 4 :: from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that all the contentions raised by the Bank and the State as regards abkari dues are left open to be decided in appropriate proceedings. (S.R.BANNURMATH) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE jes