Dismissed

A. Abdul Salam v. M/s. Prasanthi Cashew (P) Ltd. No.21

Kerala HC23 Feb 2024RP/1047/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Review petition contending the writ judgment dealt with review petitioners' properties without impleading them and led to an attachment order. The court found no error apparent on the face of the record; the judgment made no finding on the review petitioners' liability, and any grievance against the Collector's orders should be challenged separately. Review petition dismissed.

What the court decided

AI extract

A. Abdul Salam Vs M/s. Prasanthi Cashew (P) Ltd. No.21 — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 23^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶5

RP NO. 1047 OF 2023

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT WP(C) 11843/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER/THIRD PARTY:

¶8

1 A. ABDUL SALAM

¶9

AGED 71 YEARS, MANAGING PARTNER, M/S. KAIKKARA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, KAITHAVARAM BUNGLOW, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM, PIN - 691012

¶10

2 ADDL.P2.SMT.JUVAIRY SALAM W/O LATE A. ABDUL SALAM, KANKATHUMUKKU, KAITHAVARAM BUNGLOW, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM , PIN- 691012

¶11

3 ADDL.P3.FATHIMA NIYAZ D/O. LATE A. ABDUL SALAMKAITHAVARAM BUNGALOW, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM - 691 012, PRESENTLY KAIKARA HOUSE, MUSALIYAR NAGAR - 20, KILIKOLOOR P.O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691004

¶12

4 ADDL.P4.SMT.AMINA AADHIL AGED 35 YEARS, D/O. LATE A. ABDUL SALAM, KAITHAVARAM BUNGALOW, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM- 691012, PRESENTLY KAIKARA BUNGLOW, S-320, SREEPURAM ROAD, POOJAPPURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695012

¶13

5 ADDL.P5.SMT.AYSHA SALAM S. D/O. LATE A. ABDUL SALAM KAITHAVARAM BUNGALOW, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O.,KOLLAM - 691 012, PRESENTLY ASNA, KB NAGAR - 118, MADAN NADA, THEKKEVILA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691016

¶14

6 ADDL.P6.SMT.KHADEEJA SALAM D/O. LATE A. ABDUL SALAM, KAITHAVARAM BUNGALOW, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O.,KOLLAM., PIN - 691012

¶15

ADDL P2 TO ADDL P6 LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED PETITIONER ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDL.P2 TO ADDL.P6 AS PER ORDER DATED 18.1.24 IN I.A.-1/2024 IN RP NO.1047/2023 IN WP(C)11843/2015.

¶16

RP NO. 1047 OF 2023

¶17

¶18

BY ADVS. K.BABU THOMAS MARYKUTTY BABU DRISYA DILEEP

¶19

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN WPC:

¶20

1 M/S. PRASANTHI CASHEW (P) LTD. NO.21 PRASANTHI NAGAR, MANGAD, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, B. MOHANACHANDRAN NAIR, PIN - 691015

¶21

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM, PIN - 691013

¶22

3 THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001

¶23

4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER PERINAD VILLAGE, KOLLAM, PIN - 691101

¶24

SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL, SR.GP SRI.N.D.PREMACHANDRAN

¶25

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 15.02.2024, THE COURT ON 23.02.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

RP NO. 1047 OF 2023

¶27

¶28

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶29

----------------------------------R. P. No.1047 of 2023

¶30

--------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 23^rd day of February, 2024

¶31

O R D E R

¶32

Heard the learned counsel for the review petitioners, the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent/writ petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶33

This review petition is filed on the ground that the judgment under review was rendered without the review petitioner being made a party to the writ petition. It is submitted that the properties of the review petitioner were dealt with in the judgment under review and the judgment under review has resulted in Annexure-10 order of attachment of the properties of the review petitioner.

¶34

The learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent, who was the writ petitioner submits that the petitioner had purchased the property in question in a SARFAESI sale and that the original review petitioner, Sri.Abdul Salam had purchased the property in liquidation proceedings of M/s.Lakshmi Starch Ltd., the original owner. It is submitted that Abdul Salam had taken a loan from the South Indian Bank

¶35

RP NO. 1047 OF 2023

¶36

¶37

and it was pursuant to SARFAESI proceedings initiated against Abdul Salam that the property was sold in auction to the writ petitioner. Sale certificate was registered and transfer of registry was effected consequent to the sale. However, the revenue authorities took the stand that there is a charge over the property for dues of public revenue. The said action was challenged by the 1^st respondent/writ petitioner before this Court in W.P.(C) No.31511/2019 and the endorsement as to charge over the property was directed to be erased from the public records. It is submitted that the proceedings issued by the District Collector are different and separate proceedings and that the fact that such a proceedings has been issued consequent to the judgment cannot be a ground for the review petitioner to seek a review of the judgment.

¶38

Having considered the contentions advanced on either side, I notice that the only contention raised in the review petition is that Annexure A1 demand notice and A4 revenue recovery proceedings had been quashed by this Court by Annexure A5 judgment and that the impugned judgment was passed on a wrong assumption that there was a liability cast on the review petitioner to pay amounts to the revenue. I further notice that there is no finding in the judgment under review regarding the liability of the review petitioner. The finding was only that

¶39

RP NO. 1047 OF 2023

¶40

¶41

the property purchased by the 1^st respondent/writ petitioner in SARFAESI sale vested in the writ petitioner free of all encumbrances and that the said property cannot be made subject to a charge for arrears of any prior owner. If the review petitioners are aggrieved by any order passed by the District Collector, it is for them to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings. I see no error apparent on the face of the records that requires a review of the judgment.

¶42

The review petition fails and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶43

Sd/ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶44

Jvt/19.2.2024

¶45

RP NO. 1047 OF 2023

¶46

¶47

APPENDIX OF RP 1047/2023

¶48

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES

¶49

Annexure A1	TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE FOR PAYMENT OF RS.4,34,12,105/- DATED 28-5-2009
Annexure A2	TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER OF STAY IN W.P. (C) NO.31363 OF 2009 PASSED BY THIS HON. COURT DATED 4-11-2009
Annexure A3	TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER OF STAY UNTIL FURTHER ORDERS IN W.P. (C) NO.31363 OF 2009 DATED 14-9-2010
Annexure A4	TRUE COPY OF REVENUE RECOVERY DEMAND NOTICE NO.D4-3865/10 DATED NIL
Annexure A4(a)	TRUE COPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT FOR RS.593/- DATED 4-12-2017 SHOWING ATTACHMENT OF THE PROPERTY
Annexure A4(b)	TRUE COPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT FOR RS.314/- DATED NIL SHOWING ATTACHMENT OF THE PROPERTY
Annexure A5	TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P. (C) NO.31363 OF 2009 PASSED BY THIS HON. COURT DATED 11-3- 2022
Annexure A6	TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.A. NO.695 OF 2022 PASSED BY THIS HON. COURT DATED 15-6-2022
Annexure A7	TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN R.P. NO.577 OF 2022 PASSED BY THIS HON. COURT DATED 23-11-2022
Annexure A8	TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN S,L.P. (C) NO.9376 TO 9378 OF 2012 DATED 2-4-2012
Annexure A9	TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS AND ORDER DATED 11- 10-2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶50

RP NO. 1047 OF 2023

¶51

¶52

Annexure A10 TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 16-10-2019 OBTAINED UNDER RTI ACT

¶53

Annexure A 11 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN I.A. NO.753 OF 2012 IN S.A. NO.272 OF 2012 DATED 10-4-2012

¶54

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

A. Abdul Salam v. M/s. Prasanthi Cashew (P) Ltd. No.21

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A. Abdul Salam v. M/s. Prasanthi Cashew (P) Ltd. No.21

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jincy L.R. Vs Helen Hysanth Mendonz

M/S. Seethu Granites Pvt. Ltd. Vs Manoj.P.

Abraham Thomas Vs Dr.Usha Titus IAS

K.S.Joseph Vs Lijo Austine

Priya. R Vs Dr.M.Jayaprakash

Naicymol C.S Vs K.Savithri