Allowed

Noushad U.V v. the District Collector

Kerala HC17 Mar 2016WP(C)/6576/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the continued attachment of the petitioner's properties despite full payment of arrears under the Amnesty Scheme. The Court allowed the petition and directed the release of the attachment. The recovery proceedings were closed.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondents to release the attachment over the properties and treat the recovery proceedings initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act as closed.

Noushad U.V Vs the District Collector — Kerala HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/27TH PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 6576 of 2016 (V)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

NOUSHAD U.V., AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. LATE P. MOIDEEN, AL AMEEN WOOD INDUSTRIES, U.V. HOUSE, AJANUR BEACH, KOLAVAYAL P.O., KASARAGOD.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL), SRI.P.R.MILTON.

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, KASARAGOD-671 121.

¶11

2. THE TAHSILDAR (R.R) HOSDURG TALUK OFFICE, HOSDURG, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 121.

¶12

3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, HOSDURG, KASARAGOD-671 121.

¶13

BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.LILLY K.T.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

rs.

¶16

WP(C).No. 6576 of 2016 (V)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶19

P1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04/11/2013 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶20

P2TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED ORDER DATED 09/12/2013.

¶21

P3TRUE COPY OF THE CHALAN ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN 3RD DECEMBER, 2013.

¶22

P4TRUE COPY OF THE CHALAN ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN 4TH DECEMBER, 2013.

¶23

P5TRUE COPY OF THE CHALAN ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 30/12/2013.

¶24

P6TRUE COPY OF THE CHALAN ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER ON 13/12/2013.

¶25

P7TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 08/01/2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RECOVERY OFFICER.

¶26

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶31

W.P.(C). No. 6576 of 2016

¶32

===================================================== Dated this the 17^th day of March, 2016

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is essentially with regard to the continued attachment of properties belonging to the petitioner despite the fact that the petitioner has paid the entire defaulted amount due to the respondents by way of settlement under the Amnesty Scheme. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that notwithstanding the payment of the defaulted amount under the Amnesty Scheme, the respondents are refusing to release the attachment over the properties and are continuing to hold the same for no valid reasons.

¶35

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶36

The learned Government Pleader on instructions, would submit that the petitioner has in fact cleared the arrears that are due to the respondents and for recovery of which the revenue recovery steps had been initiated and the property belonging to the petitioner attached. Taking note of the said submission of learned

¶37

-2-

¶38

W.P.(C). No. 6576 of 2016

¶39

Government Pleader on instructions, I am of the view that the attachment over the property need not continue and that the revenue recovery proceedings against the petitioner ought to be dropped forthwith. Accordingly, I allow the writ petition by directing the respondents to release the attachment over the properties in question and to treat the recovery proceedings initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act, against the petitioner as closed.

¶40

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶41

das /17.03.2016

Noushad U.V v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Noushad U.V v. the District Collector

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

P.S.Manoj Kumar Vs the Repco Home Finance Ltd.

Smt.Ushakumari S. Vs the Authorized Officer

M/S. Hi-Lite Realtors (India) LLP Vs the Thahsildar

Anitha P.P. Vs State of Kerala

A.Q.Muslim Vs the Vijaya Bank

N.H.Sidhik Vs the Authorised Officer, Central Bank of India