High Court Kerala High Court

Leela P vs The Deputy Tahsildar (Rr) Kochi on 15 June, 2010

Kerala High Court
Leela P vs The Deputy Tahsildar (Rr) Kochi on 15 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18478 of 2010(H)


1. LEELA P, W/O. K PONNAN, 18/2154
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR) KOCHI 1
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.SREEKUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :15/06/2010

 O R D E R
                   P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
             ..............................................................................
                      W.P.(C) No. 18478 OF 2010
              .........................................................................
                        Dated this the 15th June, 2010



                                   J U D G M E N T

The petitioner stood as a surety to the chitty transaction

between her son and a Company by name M/s.Walk in financial

Services Pvt. Ltd. The Company subsequently went on

liquidation as per the orders passed by this Court in C.P.No. 9 of

2002. The liability of the son of the petitioner was finally

adjudicated in C.C.No. 370 of 2005, whereby a sum of Rs.

43500/- with further interest was declared as to be paid by the

subscriber to the chitty and being a surety, the liability was also

cast upon the petitioner, jointly. The learned Counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved of the coercive

proceedings taken by the respondents invoking the remedy

under the Revenue Recovery Act for realisation of the amount in

‘lump sum’. It is stated that the petitioner is ready and willing

to clear the liability by way of reasonable installments .

2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the second

W.P.(C) No. 18478 OF 2010

2

respondent as well as the learned Government Pleader for the

first respondent.

3. Considering the particular facts and circumstances , the

petitioner is permitted to clear the entire liability by way of ‘six’

equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be effected on

or before 30.06.2010 to be followed by similar installments to be

effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. Subject

to this, all further steps pursuant to Ext. P1 shall be kept in

abeyance. It is made clear that if any default is committed by the

petitioner in effecting the installments as above, the respondents

will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of

the amount in a lump sum, from the stage where it stands now.

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.

lk