IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2008 / 9TH ASHADHA 1930 WA.No. 1271 of 2008 ----------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.9678/2008 Dated 02/04/2008 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- SRI.M.O.CHAKKUNNY, S/O.OUSEPH, MOOLAN HOUSE, KOODALAPPAD, KOOVAPADY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RENNY AUGUSTINE RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, PERUMBAVOOR. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R), KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM. 4. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH, SBT BHAVAN, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER. R2 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.K.JAJU BABU. BY ADV. SRI.M.M.SAYED MUHAMMED, SC, KFC FOR R2 R4 BY STANDING COUNSELSRI.SATHISH NINAN. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON 30/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ----------------------------------------------------- W.A.No.1271 of 2008 ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 30th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. This appeal is directed against the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.9678 of 2008 dated 2-4-2008. 2. In the writ petition filed, the petitioner had sought for the following reliefs. i). to issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ direction or order for lifting the attachment order on the properties situated in Koovapady village described in Ext.P2. ii). to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, directions or order directing the Ist respondent, to decline the request of 3rd respondent to initiate revenue recovery proceedings described in Ext.P2. iii). to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order, directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to take a decision on Ext.P2 without further delay. 3. The learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition with certain directions. In our view, the petitioner should have been happy with those directions instead of questioning the same in the W.A.No.1271/2008 -2- writ appeal filed. 4. In our opinion, as we have already stated, the petitioner is requesting this Court for two reliefs. Firstly, to direct the respondents to lift the attachment order and secondly to direct the District Collector to decline to entertain the request that may be made by the Deputy Tahsildar (RR), Kerala Financial Corporation. 5. In our opinion, none of the reliefs sought for by the petitioner could be granted by any Court much less a writ Court. If for any reason the petitioner is aggrieved by the orders of attachment passed by the respondents to realise the amounts due to them from the petitioner, he has to make appropriate application before the very same authority under Section 46 of the Revenue Recovery Act. In that view of the matter, we decline to entertain this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE MS