Petitioner challenged revenue recovery proceedings for sale of her property alleged liability as surety for her son. Court held no interference while order kept property sale subject to enquiry into other surety's assets.
Petitioner dismissed; property sale not quashed but revenue to verify other surety assets first.
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 A.M.SHAFFIQUE
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/5TH KARTHIKA, 1938
WP(C).No. 29383 of 2016 (W)
PETITIONER :
KAMALAMMA, W/O.LATE VASUDEVA KURUP, AGED 75 YEARS, AJITH BHAVANAM, KALANJOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.ABHILASH SRI.PRATHEESH.P SMT.S.SEETHA SMT.RENY ANTO
RESPONDENTS:-:
R BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.P.PRADEEP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 29383 of 2016 (W)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
----------------------EXHIBIT P1 : A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 16.08.2016.
EXHIBIT P4. A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A TO JUDGE
AV
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.
------------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.29383 of 2016
----------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the revenue recovery proceedings initiated against her pursuant to Ext.P1, by which the property of the petitioner was proclaimed for sale.
W.P.(C).No.29383 of 2016
2
that there is any justification on the part of this Court to interfere with Ext.P1. The petitioner will be liable to the extent of the bond executed by her while granting registration to the dealer. However, since the petitioner has a case that another surety, wife of Anil Kumar is having sufficient property which could meet the liability, it is open for the revenue authorities to verify whether the said property could be proceeded for recovering the dues.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.
AV
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is liable for sale tax dues as a surety given her son's liability.
Whether the sale notice issued against the petitioner to be quashed due to existence of other surety.
Kamalamma
The District Collector
Tahsildar (Revenue Recovery)
The Village Officer
Commercial Tax Officer
A.M. ShaffIQUE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
