The court dismissed a writ petition filed by a guarantor challenging a revenue recovery notice. The court held that the petitioner must approach appropriate proceedings to dispute property valuation or amounts due rather than seeking writ relief.
The writ petition seeking to set aside the revenue recovery notice was dismissed.
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 MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
MONDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 14TH MAGHA, 1941
WP(C).No.1655 OF 2020(F)
PETITIONER:
C.K. HARIDASAN AGED 42 YEARS S/O.KUTTAN, CHANDRANI HOUSE, KARIMPA I VILLAGE, PALLIPPADY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.C.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
R2 BY SRI.SALIL NARAYANAN K.A., SC, KSFE LTD.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.1655 OF 2020(F)
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 3rd day of February 2020
This writ petition is filed seeking direction to the respondents to
set aside a revenue recovery notice dated 21.12.2019. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the guarantor has already furnished the security and that the action of the respondents in proceeding against the petitioner for recovery of amounts due, is illegal.
WP(C).No.1655 OF 2020(F)
3
existent with that of a Principal Debtor.
Having considered the contentions advanced on either side and in view of the fact that the very same property has been pledged by the 1st respondent for amounts due to the 2nd respondent, I am of the opinion that the prayers sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted. It is for the petitioner to take up any dispute, he may have, as to the value of the property or the amounts due in appropriate proceedings.
The writ petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN
JUDGE
SVP
WP(C).No.1655 OF 2020(F)
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1
THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY THAHASILDAR.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking to set aside a revenue recovery notice against a guarantor should be allowed given the security and valuation disputes.
Whether a dispute regarding property valuation or amounts due in chitty/loan transactions can be adjudicated through a writ petition.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
George v. Bank of IndiaReferred¶23
George v. Bank of India [2001 (1) KLT 303]
C.K. Haridasan
Anu Prathap M.V.
The Manager, K.S.F.E., Kalladikode Branch
The Office of the Deputy Tahasildar, K.S.F.E.
State of Kerala
Anu Sivaraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
