Allowed

Ambily a.R., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Feb 2020WP(C)/1293/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging revenue recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioners' house. The court directed that recovery notices be issued only against the borrower and guarantor, excluding the property belonging exclusively to the non-guarantor spouse.

What did the court decide?

Directed that proceedings shall be only against properties of borrowers and guarantor; property belonging exclusively to the 1st petitioner shall not be proceeded with.

Ambily a.R., Vs State of Kerala — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 22ND MAGHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.1293 OF 2020(J)

¶6

PETITIONERS :-

¶7

1 AMBILY A.R., AGED 24 YEARS, D/O.RAVEENDRAN PILLAI, ATTUPURATH HOUSE, KARIKODE.P.O, EDAVETTY, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 588, FROM MULAMATTATHIL HOUSE, KUMARAMANGALAM.P.O, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI - 685 608.

¶8

2 SIJUMON M.S., AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.SASIDHARAN NAIR, ATTUPURATH HOUSE, KARIKODE.P.O, EDAVETTY, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 588, FROM MULAMATTATHIL HOUSE, KUMARAMANGALAM.P.O, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI - 685 608.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.PRAVEEN S. SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G SRI.DIPU JAMES SRI.MATHEW K.T. SRI.GEORGE K.V.

¶10

RESPONDENTS :-

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶12

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, IDUKKI, KUYILIMALA, PAINAVU, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 603.

¶13

3 THE DEPUTY TAHSILDHAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION, THODUPUZHA - 685 584.

¶14

4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KARIKODE VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 605.

¶15

WP(C).No.1293 OF 2020(J)

¶16

-: 2 :-

¶17

5 THE BANK OF INDIA THODUPUZHA BRANCH, SREEVALSAM BUILDINGS, TEMPLE BYE-PASS ROAD, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 584, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER

¶18

6 BIJU KUMAR V.G., AGED 48 YEARS S/O.GOPINATHAN, VALLADIYIL HOUSE, VENMONY.P.O., KANJIKUZHY VILLAGE, IDUKKI TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 606.

¶19

BY SMT.PRINCY XAVIER, GP BY SRI.J.HARIKUMAR, SC

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C).No.1293 OF 2020(J)

¶22

-: 3 :-

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Dated this the 11th day of February 2020

¶25

This writ petition is filed challenging the revenue recovery proceedings initiated at the instance of the 5^th respondent by Exts.P3 and P4. The contention of the petitioners is that the 1^st petitioner, who is the wife of the 2^nd petitioner, is the owner of 5 cents of property in Karikkode Village of Thodupuzha Taluk, where their residential house is located. It is stated that the 2^nd petitioner was one of the partners of a firm and was a surety with regard to a loan availed by the 6^th respondent. It is submitted that on the strength of agreements executed by the 6^th respondent and the deed of guarantee executed by the 2^nd petitioner, the respondents are proceeding against the property belonging to the 1^st petitioner.

¶26

Sri.J.Harikumar, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 5^th respondent submits that the loan was availed by the 6^th respondent and that the 2^nd petitioner was a co-obligant and a partner of the firm, which availed the loan. It is stated that the loan was a priority loan under the Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana and that an amount of Rs.2,54,041/- is due on the loan. It is submitted that Exts.P3 and P4 itself would show that the recovery notices are issued as against the 6^th respondent and the 2^nd

¶27

WP(C).No.1293 OF 2020(J)

¶28

-: 4 :-

¶29

petitioner alone and that there is no proceeding against the 1^st petitioner and the property belonging exclusively to the 1^st petitioner will not be proceeded against since the 1^st petitioner is not a guarantor to the loan transaction.

¶30

The said submissions are recorded. It is directed that the proceedings shall be only against the properties of the borrowers and the property belonging exclusively to the 1^st petitioner shall not be proceeded with.

¶31

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶32

Sd/ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶33

Jvt/14.2.2020

¶34

WP(C).No.1293 OF 2020(J)

¶35

-: 5 :-

¶36

APPENDIX

¶37

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶38

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT NO.1572382 DATED 17.07.2019 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF LICENCE NO.130190011903107 DTD 11.12.2019 ISSUED BY LOCAL AUTHORITY.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE RRC NO.2019/2004/06 DTD 28.06.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF NOTICE RRC NO.2019/2004/06 DTD 29.06.2019 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶39

//TRUE COPY//

¶40

P.A. TO JUDGE

Ambily a.R., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambily a.R., 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

K.P.Varghese, Vs Government of Kerala

Sakeer Hussain Vs State of Kerala

Gurudeva Rice and Agro Products Private Limited, Vs the Kerala Financial Corporation

George Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Rejimon P.K., Vs the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Limited

K.Daniel Vs the Land Revenue Commissioner