The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition filed by an agricultural worker against recovery proceedings involving attachment of his movables, noting he could file a petition if properties are attached, relying on M.S. Khadija.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH
MONDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2009 / 15TH POUSHA 1930
WP(C).No. 320 of 2009(K)
PETITIONER(S):
SAJEEVAN, S/O.DHANAPALAN, VALLARKOTTU HOUSE, VATTAPARA P.O.,
SANTHANPARA VIA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM (SR.)
SRI.S.SHARAN
RESPONDENT(S):
R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN R4 & R5 BY SC SRI. P.P. THAJUDEEN.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K.M.JOSEPH, J.
JUDGMENT
Briefly put the case of the petitioner is as follows:
Petitioner and his wife were allotted domestic electric connection. They are agricultural workers and not conducting any industry. There was a demand notice issued to the wife of the petitioner, which was challenged and this court disposed of the writ petition by Ext.P1 judgment. Petitioner's wife also filed a complaint and Ext.P2 FIR is registered. On 10.12.2008, it is the case of the petitioner that, the third respondent (Village Officer) came to the petitioner's house to attach the movables of the petitioner. Petitioner immediately filed Ext.P3 representation. It is stated that the third respondent has not conducted any inquiry.
WPC. 320/2009. 2
belonging to the petitioner. The property of the petitioner cannot be proceeded with unless the petitioner has any independent liability.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
(K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE)
sb
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
M.S.Khadija v. Deputy Tahsildar (Revenue), KottayamReferred¶32
M.S.Khadija v. Deputy Tahsildar (Revenue), Kottayam (1974 KLT SN 3)
Sajeevan
State of Kerala
K.M.Joseph
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
K.M.Joseph
Parties & counsel
