Dismissed

Rajendran v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Feb 2007OP/3418/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposes of an original petition challenging revenue recovery notices. The court directs Tahsildars to examine title deeds after arbitration. Recovery will proceed only against the defaulter's property or any transferred assets found invalid under Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act or subject to charge under Section 44 of the Recovery of Unpaid Wages Act. Petitioners must inheri

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 3-6 to conduct enquiry through title deeds; recovery continued only against defaulter's property or invalidly transferred assets.

Rajendran Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2007 / 13TH MAGHA 1928

¶5

OP.No. 3418 of 2002(F)

¶6

---------------------PETITIONERS: ------------

¶7

RAJENDRAN,KOCHUMADATHIL,IRUMPOZHIKKARA, VAIKOM.

¶8

HARIDAS,VANIBHAVAN,THOTTAKOM P.O., VAIKOM

¶9

VIJAYAN,CHAKIRIYODU,THOTTAKOM P.O., VAIKOM.

¶10

INDIRA,MOLAMAMNIKKATHIL,PUTHENKAVU, TRIPUNITHURA.

¶11

BABU,CHAKIRIYODU,THOTTAKOM P.O.,VAIKOM.

¶12

MOLLY,CHAKIRIYODU,THOTTAKOM P.O.,VAIKOM.

¶13

THANKAPPAN,PONGANPARAYIL,EDAMARUKU P.O., ERATTUPETTA.

¶14

SYAMALA,VIJU BHAVAN,KELAKOM P.O.,KANNUR.

¶15

SIVADASAN,PRIYA BHAVAN,KAVARAPPADYNADA, VAIKOM.

¶16

MURALEEDHARAN,KATTUKARAYIL,ULLALA,VAIKOM

¶17

PRASANNAN,KATTUKARAYIL,ULLALA,VAIKOM.

¶18

SABU,KATTUKARAYIL,ULLALA,VAIKOM.

¶19

BHAVANI,KATTUKARAYIL,ULLALA,VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.PKM.HASSAN SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER

¶20

RESPONDENTS:

¶21

¶22

STATE OF KERALA,RFEPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,LABOUR DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶23

KOTTAYAM DISTRICT TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR,DISTRICT OFFICE,KOTTAYAM.

¶24

TAHSILDAR,VAIKOM.

¶25

TAHSILDAR,KANAYANNOOR.

¶26

TAHSILDAR,MEENACHIL

¶27

TAHSILDAR,THALASSERY.

¶28

A.D.SAMKUTTAN (SABU),ARACKAL HOUSE, UDAYANAPURAM P.O.,VAIKOM.

¶29

A.D.SHIBU,ARACKAL HOUSE,UDAYANAPURAM P.O VAIKOM.

¶30

BY ADV. SRI.K.K.BABU, SC,KTWWF BOARD ADV. SHRI. A.K.JOHN, SC ADV. SMT. SMITHA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶31

THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/02/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

O.P.No. 3418/2002

¶33

ORDER ON CMP NO.6118/2002 IN O.P.No. 3418/2002

¶34

DISMISSED.

¶35

02/02/2007 SD/- (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)

¶36

APPENDIX

¶37

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶38

EXT.P1 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14/02/2001 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶39

EXT.P2 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12/10/2001 IN O.P.No. 30696/2001. EXT.P3 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22/11/2001 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

// TRUE COPY //

PA TO JUDGE

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

¶44

O.P. No. 3418 of 2002

¶45

Dated, this the 2^nd day of February, 2007

¶46

J U D G M E N T

¶47

Petitioners are challenging revenue recovery notice for recovery of arrears of Toddy Workers Welfare Fund, due from their deceased father Shri.Vasudevan. Liability pertains to the year 1992-93. The specific case of the petitioners is that they have not inherited any property from the defaulter and the property belonging to the defaulter is already attached and is in the custody of the recovery authorities. In the circumstances, O.P is disposed of directing the 3^rd respondent to peruse the title deeds of the property held by the petitioners and if defaulter has not transferred any property to petitioners after incurring liability then he will exclude those properties from attachment or sale. However, if defaulter has transferred the properties to defraud creditors such transactions can be treated as invalid under Sec. 53 of the Transfer of Property Act. Similarly if any transfer is made after issuance of notice, then there will be charge on property by virtue of operation of Sec. 44 of the RR Act. O.P. is

¶48

O.P.No. 3418/2002

¶49

-Page numbers-

¶50

disposed of directing respondents 3 to 6 to conduct enquiry as above with reference to documents / title deeds and proceedings

¶51

for recovery will be continued only against property of the defaulter and property if any transferred by the defaulter, which is found invalid or subject to charge as above

¶52

This O.P. is disposed of as above.

¶53

(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.)

¶54

Rajendran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Keralastate Vs P.G.Jagannivasan

P.Sankaran Vs the Director of Fisheries,Kollam

State Bank of India Vs Beevi Asura

John K.Thomas Vs the Divl.Forest Officer

Abdul Kareem Vs State of Kerala

Kerala Motor Transport Workers Wel. Vs State of Kerala