IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2011 / 11TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 3077 of 2011(H) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. SREERAM G.NAIR, S/O.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SREERANGINI, SASTHAMCOIL ROAD, THYCAUD, TRIVANDRUM-14. 2. SREEDEVI G.NAIR, AGED 16 YEARS, (MINOR), D/O.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SREERANGINI, SASTHAMCOIL ROAD, THYCAUD, TRIVANDRUM-14, REPRESENTED BY BROTHER- NEXT FRIEND-IST PETITIONER. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER, SRI.R.JAIKRISHNA. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, MUSEUM JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. TAHSILDAR (RR), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33. 4. VASANTH HOTELS PVT. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, AJITH KUMAR, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 5. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (WORKS CONTRACT), IST CIRCLE, PEROORKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 005. R1 TO R3 & R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 3077 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Immovable properties gifted to the petitioners by his father, mother and grand mother, through Exts.P1 and P1(a) deeds, were proceeded against under the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act, for realising tax amount due from the 4th respondent company, to which the father and mother of the petitioners were Directors. 2. The question regarding liability to be proceeded against the property covered by Exts. P1 and P1(a) was the subject matter of adjudication before the District Collector (2nd respondent) and through Ext.P7 order it was found that the transaction in question is hit by section 44(2) of the Revenue Recovery Act and the property is liable to be proceeded against. 3. Aggrieved by Ext.P7 the petitioner had preferred revision petition before the 1st respondent as provided under section 83(1) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. Grievance of the petitioner is that pending consideration and disposal of the revision petition by the 1st respondent, steps has now been WP(C).3077/2011 2 initiated for sale of the property, on publishing Ext.P8 notice. Hence the petitioner seeks direction from this court for an early disposal of Ext.P9 revision petition by the 1st respondent and till then to keep in abeyance further actions for sale of the property. 4. Considering pendency of the statutory revision before the 1st respondent, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of on issuing necessary directions for early consideration of the matter by that authority. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P9 revision petition and to dispose of the same or to consider the request made therein for interim relief and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as early as possible, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 6. Till such time orders are passed by the 1st respondent as directed above, further proceedings for sale of the property, which is now initiated on the basis of Ext.P8 notice, shall be kept in abeyance. WP(C).3077/2011 3 7. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/