IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2010 / 9TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 26941 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MRS.ANNAM, AGED 61 YEARS, W/O.ANTONY MOOLAMKUZHI HOUSE, VADAKKADAM, VARAPUZHA VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.GEORGE(PUTHIYIDAM) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. 2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR) NORTH PARAVUR, NORTH PARAVUR PO,ERNAKULAM. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER VARAPUZHA, VARAPUZHA PO, ERNAKULAM. 4. BANK OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER EZHIKKARA BRANCH, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN ADV. SRI.P.P.JOYI FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No. 26941 of 2010-P ---------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T Grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 2 and 3 are threatening coercive steps for attachment and sale of movables belonging to the petitioner and her husband, for recovering arrears due from her son to the fourth respondent Bank. According to the petitioner the house in which she is residing with her husband stands in her name and the defaulter son is not in station and there is no movables belonging to the defaulter situated in the house. It is submitted by the petitioner that respondents 2 and 3 are threatening with attachment and sale of movable and immovable properties belonging to the petitioner, on the ground that the defaulter son is not in station and no proceedings of recovery can be initiated against him. 2. It is pointed out by the petitioner that the defaulter son has got immovable properties situated in Re. Sy.No.450/13 of Block No.10 in Nedumbassery Village in Aluva Taluk, and that she has no objection in proceeding against property of her son. Hence the W.P(C) No. 26941 of 2010-P 2 petitioner is seeking directions for restraining the respondents from taking any steps against her properties. 3. Heard Sri.P.P.Joy, learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent Bank as well the learned Government Pleader. 4. It is pointed out by learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent that the petitioner, inspite of her contention, has not produced any documents to show that the house in which she residing belongs to her. It is pointed out that Ext.P5 document produced in this case relates to property belonging to the son, who is a defaulter. The question whether the respondents 2 and 3 are proceeding against the properties of the petitioner or as to whether the proceedings are pursued only against properties of the defaulter, is purely a factual aspect. It is evident that neither the petitioner nor her properties are liable to be proceeded for realizing the amount due from her son. 5. In this regard the petitioner had submitted Ext.P4 before the respondents 2 and 3 seeking to restrain from attaching any movables belonging to her and her husband, situated in the place of their residence. It is for respondents 2 and 3 to consider Ext.P4 and to take a decision as to whether the properties claimed by the W.P(C) No. 26941 of 2010-P 3 petitioner belongs to the defaulter or not. 6. Under the above mentioned circumstances the second respondent is directed to consider Ext.P4 and to take a decision thereof, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within two weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment. A decision in this regard shall be communicated to her, in case it is intend to proceed against the properties, which are claimed to be in ownership and possession of her husband. 7. Needless to say that the respondents are at liberty to proceed against properties of the defaulter, both immovable and movables. However, proceedings against movables situated in the house wherein the petitioner is residing shall be kept in abeyance till a decision is taken by the second respondent as directed above. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab W.P(C) No. 26941 of 2010-P 4