The Tahsildar (Rr) vs State Bank Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 8200 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH
     TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1945
                       OP (DRT) NO. 80 OF 2014
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTOA 106/2001 OF DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL,
                              ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER:

          THE TAHSILDAR (RR)
          KOLLAM.
          BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE BANK OF INDIA
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (CERTIFICATE HOLDER BANK)
          REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER.
    2     T.SAJEEV
          SHYLAJA MANDIRAM, MUKHATHALA P.O.
          THRIKKOVILVATTAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM.
          BY ADVS.
          SRI.S.M.ALTHAF
          SRI.S.M.ALTHAF


          S.M.ALTHAF



     THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 01.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP(DRT) No.80 of 2014
                                    2



                               JUDGMENT

Dated this the 1st day of August, 2023

1. Heard Ms.Reshmitha Ramachandran,

learned Government Pleader for the petitioner as

well as Sri.S.M Althaf, learned counsel appearing for

the 2nd respondent.

2. This writ petition has been filed under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugning

Ext.P1 order passed by the Recovery Officer, Debt

Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam for mutating the

property belonging to Panchami Exporters Pvt.Ltd

admeasuring 84 cents lying in Re-Sy No.428/8 of

Pallimon Village, which the 2nd respondent

purchased in public auction on 11.12.2008 for

Rs.4,10,000/- and the said amount was paid by him.

3. The 2nd respondent, the auction purchaser

approached the petitioner, Tahsildar, Kollam for

mutation of the property purchased in auction. The

Revenue Officer denied the prayer for mutation on OP(DRT) No.80 of 2014

the ground that the property was already attached

towards sales tax dues.

4. The 2nd respondent thereafter filed I.A

No.1002/2010 before the Recovery Officer of the

Debt Recovery Tribunal seeking an order against the

petitioner herein to effect mutation of the property

or return the purchased money to the 2nd respondent.

He stated that no notice was issued on the said I.A to

the Tahsildar and without hearing the Tahsildar, the

Recovery Officer directed in to effect mutation of

property in the name of the 2nd respondent.

5. It is submitted that sales tax arrears

against the Panchami Exporters Pvt.Ltd for the

assessment year 1998-1999 to 1999-2000

Rs.1,48,78,140/-. The Central Excise dues amounting

to Rs.15,00,000/- and an amount of Rs.4,44,788/- was

also due to the Kerala State Electricity Board

towards Electricity charges.

OP(DRT) No.80 of 2014

6. Considering the fact that the huge amount

of arrears of sales tax and other dues were pending

on the date when the auction took place, which was

incumbent upon the Recovery Officer who grant

hearing to the Tahsildar before passing the

impugned order.

7. In view thereof, this writ petition is

allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The

Recovery Officer is directed to issue proper notice to

the Tahsildar on the I.A No.1002/2010 filed by the 2 nd

respondent and after hearing the parties pass a fresh

order in accordance with law. The Recovery Officer

should finalise the proceedings in the said I.A

expeditiously in accordance with law.

Sd/-

DINESH KUMAR SINGH

JUDGE AP OP(DRT) No.80 of 2014

APPENDIX OF OP (DRT) 80/2014

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXT.P-1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.1002/2010 DATED 26.6.2012 OF RECOVERY OFFICER IN O.A.NO.106/2001 OF DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.