High Court Kerala High Court

Syed M.Sheeba vs The Additional Tahssildar on 29 May, 2008

Kerala High Court
Syed M.Sheeba vs The Additional Tahssildar on 29 May, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 7801 of 2004(D)


1. SYED M.SHEEBA, W/O.ABDUL SALAM,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. ABDUL SALAM, S/O.MOIDEEN, EDAVANA VEEDU

                        Vs



1. THE ADDITIONAL TAHSSILDAR, ALUVA.
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ALUVA WEST.

3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (R.R), SPECIAL

4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.

5. K.K.VIJAYAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, RESIDING

6. THANKAMANI, W/O.K.K.VIHAYAN, RESIDING

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.VINOD CHANDRAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :29/05/2008

 O R D E R
                  C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
                  --------------------------------------------
                       W.P.C. NO. 7801 OF 2004
                  --------------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 29th day of May, 2008

                                JUDGMENT

W.P. is filed by petitioners who have purchased property from

respondents 5 and 6, for direction to the Village Officer to effect

mutation based on the transfer deed. Government Pleader reported that

since the original owners were in arrears of tax, objection to mutation

is absolutely tenable. Section 26A of the KGST Act creates a charge

on the property of the dealer for the tax liability. Moreover it is not

known whether revenue recovery notice was issued prior to registration

of sale deed and if so there will be charge on the property by virtue of

section 44 of the RR Act also. However, if defaulters or petitioners

clear the arrears, then mutation will be effected subject to right of

petitioners to recover the same from the sellers. In any case, there is no

justification to delay the matter indenfinitely. W.P. is disposed of

directing the third respondent to proceed for recovery by attachment

and sale of other properties of the defaulters, if available, details of

which will be furnished by the petitioner. However, if no other

2

property is available, recovery can be continued against the property

purchased by the petitioners. There will be direction to the third

respondent to complete the recovery proceedings within four months

from today. Petitioner will produce copy of this judgment before third

respondent for compliance. If recovery is not effected, District

Collector will take appropriate action against subordinate recovery

authorities. Since Amensty Scheme is now available, it will be open to

the petitioners or defaulters to settle liaibility and liberate the property

from attachment.

(C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)
Judge
kk

3