IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2011 / 17TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 496 of 2011(J) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ DHARMAPALAN, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.RAGAVAN, PATTALIL HOUSE, PAINOOR AMSOM DESOM, EDATHIRUTHI VILLAGE, VALAPAD, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.RAJIT, SRI.V.V.JOY. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR, COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 001. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, KODUNGALOOR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 506. 3. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM, COMPANY LAW BOARD, 3RD FLOOR, THRIKKAKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM - 682 030. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.MONI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.496 of 2011-J. = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7th January, 2011. J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against the revenue recovery proceedings initiated on the basis of Ext.P1 notices, issued under Section 34 and 7 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. It is evident that the amount sought to be recovered is the amount due under a decree of this Court passed in a Company Claim, CC.No.154/2006 in CP.No.1/2000. 2. The petitioner could not successfully raised any challenge against the liability, since the decree in the company petition had attained finality and the petitioner has not chosen to challenge the same in any statutory appeal. Under such circumstance I find no merit in the contentions. However, learned counsel for the petitioner made an appeal to this Court to permit to remit the entire amounts in default, within a reasonable time, in instalments. 3. Heard learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator representing the company in liquidation. 4. Considering the limited prayer of the petitioner I am of WP(C).No.496 of 2011-J. 2 the view that some indulgence can be shown in permitting remittance of the amount within a reasonable time. 5. Hence the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to keep in abeyance further coercive steps of recovery on the basis of Ext.P1 notice, provided the petitioner is remitting the entire amount in arrears along with interest, if any due, in five equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 28.2.2011 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondent will be free to proceed with further steps pursuant to Ext.P1 recovery notice. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, (Judge) Kvs/-