Kerala High Court
Davis T D vs State Of Kerala on 6 February, 2024
Author: P Gopinath
Bench: P Gopinath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 17TH MAGHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 10307 OF 2015
PETITIONER:
T.D.DAVIS,
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O.DEVASSIKUTTY, CONTRACTOR, THACHIL KANNAI HOUSE,
PUTHENCHIRA VILLAGE, PUTHENCHIRA EAST P O, MUKUNDAPURAM
TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 682.
BY ADV SRI.SHIJU VARGHEESE
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.
2 BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
VELLAMKALLOOR BLOCK PANCHAYATH, VADAKKUMKARA VILLAGE,
VELLAMKALLOOR P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR
DISTRICT, PIN - 680 662.
3 DEPUTY TAHASILDAR,
OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY),
MUKUNDAPURAM, IRINJALAKUDA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680 121.
4 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
THRISSUR, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOL P.O. THRISSUR
DISTRICT, PIN - 680 003.
BY ADVS.
SRI. DHEERAJ A S (GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 10307 OF 2015
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the
Revenue Recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner on
the ground that certain excess amount was paid to the petitioner on
account of work completed by the petitioner for the respondents.
The Revenue Recovery notice issued by the Deputy Tahsildar
(Revenue Recovery), Mukundapuram is on record as Ext.P3, where
an amount of Rs.1,44,758/- is sought to be recovered from the
petitioner.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that the petitioner had filed O.S.No.4547/2014 before the
Principal Munsiff's Court, Irinjalakuda claiming certain amounts
from the respondents and also contending that the amount sought
to be recovered under Ext.P3 is not recoverable from the petitioner.
Ext.P9 is a copy of the judgment in O.S.No.4547/2014. The suit has
been decreed permitting the petitioner to recover a sum of
Rs.2,96,984/- with 12% interest from date of suit till date of decree
and thereafter with 6% interest till date of realization. An appeal
filed against the said judgment as A.S.No.174/2017 before the
Subordinate Judges Court, Irinjalakuda has been partly allowed and
WP(C) NO. 10307 OF 2015
the amount to which the petitioner is entitled to has been reduced to
Rs.1,89,704/- together with interest on the said amount. R.S.A
No.149/2022 is pending before this Court at the instance of
respondents 1 and 2.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned Government Pleader, I am of the view that since after
considering the claim of the respondents that they had paid an
amount of Rs.1,44,758/- in excess to the petitioner, the trial court
had granted a decree for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,96,984/-
together with interest thereon in terms of Ext.P9 judgment and
Ext.P10 decree in O.S.No.4547/2014 on the file of the Principal
Munsiff, Irinjalakuda. A reading of paragraph 13 and 14 of Ext.P9
judgment will indicate that the question regarding the amount
allegedly paid in excess to the petitioner (Rs.1,44,758/-) which is
sought to be recovered by initiating Revenue Recovery proceedings
was also subject matter of the suit. In appeal, the said amount has
been modified and the petitioner is now found entitled to a sum of
Rs.1,89,704/-. Respondents 1 and 2 are before this Court in R.S.A
No.149/2022. In the light of the findings of the Civil Court, it cannot
be said that any amount is presently due from the petitioner.
WP(C) NO. 10307 OF 2015
5. Therefore, the Revenue Recovery proceedings initiated
against the petitioner can only be quashed making it clear that the
question as to whether any amount is due from the petitioner will
depend on the findings of this Court in R.S.A No.149/2022.
Therefore, this writ petition is allowed and Ext.P3 will stand
quashed, making it clear that further recovery proceedings shall be
initiated against the petitioner only if it is found after the disposal of
R.S.A No.149/2022 that no amount is payable to the petitioner.
The writ petition will stand disposed of as above.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
DK
WP(C) NO. 10307 OF 2015
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10307/2015
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT
BEARING NO. D-34/2005 - 2006 DATED
29/08/2005.
EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF PART
PAYMENT OF A BILL OF RS.7,67,040/-
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
30/06/2006.
EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED
30/09/2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
21/10/2014 SENT BY THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO.
4547/2014 DATED 25/10/2014.
EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT
FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
06/12/2014.
EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT IN IA NO. 6268/2014
DATED 16/03/2015.
EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
16/03/2015 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
31/07/2017 IN O.S 4547/2014 ON THE
FILES OF THE HONOURABLE PRINCIPAL
MUNSIFF'S COURT, IRINJALAKUDA
EXT. P10 TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 31/072017
IN O.S 4547/2014 ON THE FILES OF THE
HONOURABLE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT,
IRINJALAKUDA
