High Court Kerala High Court

S.Subhalakshmi vs State Of Kerala on 26 March, 2008

Kerala High Court
S.Subhalakshmi vs State Of Kerala on 26 March, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 13897 of 2007(D)


1. S.SUBHALAKSHMI.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY)

3. MANAGER,

4. SMT.DEEPA VARGHESE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR)

                For Respondent  :SRI.A.S.P.KURUP, SC, UBI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :26/03/2008

 O R D E R
                          ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                  -----------------------------------------------
                      W.P.(C) No. 13897 OF 2007
                  -----------------------------------------------
                Dated this the 26th day of March, 2008

                                JUDGMENT

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is a successful purchaser

of a plot of land that was sold by the 3rd respondent bank. It is

stated that, in view of the revenue recovery proceedings initiated

by the State for realising the sale tax arrears, the sale could not be

concluded. Although the petitioner has deposited 25% of the sale

consideration. In these circumstances, to get the sale concluded,

this writ petition has been filed.

2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned

counsel for the petitioner requested that he will be satisfied if the

amount deposited by him is refunded to him. Petitioner also has a

claim for interest on the amount deposited by him. Considering

the fact that as per the sale conducted by the bank, the petitioner

had deposited an amount as above and the sale cannot be

concluded, not for the reason attributable to the petitioner, it is

only fair that the amount deposited by the petitioner will be

refunded to him. Since the bank also cannot be faulted for not

WPC No. 13897 OF 2007
2

concluding the sale, I cannot insist the bank to give interest on the

deposit made by the petitioner. Therefore, I direct that the bank

shall repay the amount deposited by the petitioner. The petitioner

shall make a representation before the 3rd respondent within 10

days from today, in which case the 3rd respondent shall pass

appropriate orders on that representation in the light of the

observations made as above, within two weeks thereafter.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

ttb

WPC No. 13897 OF 2007
3