Friday vs For Information Purpose Only
2021 Latest Caselaw 11825 Ker

WP(C) 9226/2021                                 1/3



                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                            Present:
                     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

                      Friday, the 9th day of April 2021/19th Chaithra, 1943
                                   WP(C) No.9226/2021(C)
PETITIONER
            For information purpose only
       M/S.CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE CO LTD.
       HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT DARE HOUSE, NO.2, N.S.C.BOSE
       ROAD, PARRYS, CHENNAI - 600 001, AND HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE
       AT FIRST FLOOR, SREEVALSAM BUILDING, EAST NADAKKAVU,
       KOZHIKODE - 670 006 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
       RAJEEV KUMAR M.R., S/O.LATE RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 45 YEARS,
       REGIONAL LEGAL MANAGER(KERALA II).
RESPONDENTS
1.THE TAHASILDAR, TIRUR TALUK
      TALUK OFFICE, TIRUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 101.
2.THE VILLAGE OFFICER
      TIRUR VILLAGE, TIRUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 101.
3.THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER
      OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, THIRURANGADI
      P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676306.
4.S.SENTHIL KUMAR
      S/O.SHANMUGHAM K., 26E, KALIPALAYAM ROAD, JAMIN, UTHUKULI,
      POLLACHI, TAMILNADU - 642 001.

   Writ Petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed
along with the WP(C) the High Court be pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to
Exhibit P-3 and P-4 pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of justice.


   This petition coming on for admission upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in
support of WP(C) and upon hearing the arguments of SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN, Advocate
for the petitioner and of GOVERNMENT PLEADER for R1 to R3, the court passed the
following
 WP(C) 9226/2021                            2/3




                                   A.M.BADAR, J.
                                       -------------
                              WP(C) No.9226 of 2021
                                       -------------
                          Dated this the 9th day of April 2021


           For information purpose only
                        ORDER

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. He argued that on commencement of the revenue recovery proceedings, the petitioner preferred statutory objection Ext.P5 as envisaged by the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act and it was the statutory duty of the respondents to consider and enquire the said objection and to pass appropriate order thereon. However, despite judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.29174 of 2020 by which the respondent-Tahsildar was directed to consider the objection as per the mandate of Section 34(2) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, the respondent-Tahsildar, vide communication at Ext.P7, has abdicated his duty and refused to entertain the objection raised by the petitioner. A perusal of the order at Ext.P7 prima facie shows that there is no adjudication of statutory objection, Ext.P5 preferred by the petitioner by the respondent-Tahsildar.

Notice before admission to 4th respondent returnable after ten weeks. Learned Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 to 3. In the meanwhile, interim relief as prayed.

Sd/-

A.M BADAR, JUDGE

smp

/true copy/ Sd/-

                                                                 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
 WP(C) 9226/2021                  3/3

EXHIBIT P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 26/02/2020 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE KERALA REVENUE RECOVERY ACT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 26/02/2020 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE KERALA REVENUE RECOVERY ACT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

For information purpose only EXHIBIT P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 09/03/2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 17/02/2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.