IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 29231 of 2006(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. KALAMULLA VALAPPIL PANDAN SREEJESH, S/O. BHASKARAN, "SHEEMAS", PANAMKAVE,CHIRAKKAL P.O KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. VIJAYALAKSHMI K., D/O. K.K. APPAN, "JYOTHIS", NEAR VADESWARAN TEMPLE, AROLI P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE SRI.SUDHEESH THAROL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KANNUR-I, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, KANNUR. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. K.P. JYOTHISH, S/O. BHASKARAN, PROPRIETOR, GEETHA BAKERY, CALTEX JUNCTION, KANNUR-2, KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY G.P. SRI.TEKCHAND ADV. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DT.23.10.2003 EXECUTED BY 1ST PETITIONER K.P.AJITHKUMAR AND R4. P2: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT.27.3.2006 SENT BY 1ST PETITIONER TO R2 AND R3. P3: TRUE COPY OF MAHAZAR DT.27.10.2006 PREPARED BY R1. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.29231 of 2006 .................................................................... Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT The W.P.(C) is filed challenging recovery proceedings against property inherited by petitioners from defaulter namely, one Mr.Pandan Krishnan who is no more. Petitioners' case is that under agreement with 4th respondent who is son of the defaulter, the 4th respondent has undertaken to clear the arrears of tax and therefore, recovery should not be taken against their property. The prayer cannot be granted because this court cannot in writ proceedings enforce agreement among private individuals. It is for the petitioners to seek remedy before the civil court for enforcement of agreement against 4th respondent. However, since defaulter's property can be proceeded against for recovery of arrears of sales tax under Sections 26A and 26B of the KGST Act, respondents 1 to 3 are directed to proceed against the properties of the defaulter inherited by the petitioners, if arrears are not settled. The W.P.(C) is dismissed with the specific direction as above. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms