IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 10138 of 2005(F)
1. P.RAVINDRAN NAIR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR),
... Respondent
2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :14/08/2008
O R D E R
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
....................................................................
W.P.(C) No.10138 of 2005
....................................................................
Dated this the 14th day of August, 2008.
JUDGMENT
The question raised is whether revenue recovery can be continued
against the petitioner for recovery of amount due under the Criminal Court
order convicting him for offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act. Even though this court made the complainant
namely, the beneficiary of the judgment as a respondent in this W.P., notice
could not be served because petitioner did not furnish the correct address.
Government Pleader submitted that compensation imposed by the Criminal
Court along with fine could be recovered in recovery proceedings by virtue
of decision of this court. The petitioner has not produced copy of the
judgment of the Criminal Court for this court to examine whether amount
sought to be recovered is only fine or atleast in substance whether it is
compensation. In the absence of the order based on which recovery is
continued, this court cannot decide the matter. If petitioner pleads want of
means for payment, then I do not know what is the grievance petitioner can
have against recovery proceedings because if he has no assets, recovery
also is not possible. In any case since judgment of the Criminal Court is
2
not produced in court, the W.P. is closed leaving freedom to the petitioner
to raise objection against recovery before the first respondent for him to
decide the same before proceeding for recovery.
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Judge
pms