LAWS(KER)-1993-7-29

SAINALABDEEN MUSLIAR Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

Decided On July 08, 1993
SAINALABDEEN MUSLIAR Appellant
V/S
DISTRICT COLLECTOR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ petitioner in O.P.9732/1992 challenges the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 23-3-1993 dismissing the said Original Petition.

(2.) The short facts necessary for the disposal of this writ appeal are as follows. Kallada Bricks and Tile Works was owned by the father of the third respondent. On his death, the business devolved on third respondent, his mother and brothers and sisters. Third respondent was the Managing Partner of the factory. 4th respondent was an employee in that factory. He was dismissed from service. That gave rise to Industrial Dispute 31/1988. Labour Court, Kollam directed the management to reinstate the worker with all back arrears and other attendant service benefits by its award dated 17-4-1989. As the workman was not paid his wages in terms of the award, he approached the Labour Court, Kollam by moving Claim Petition 85/1989 under S.33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, hereinafter referred to as "the Act". That Court, by order dated 18-9-1991, fixed the amount payable to the workman at Rs. 52,388/-

(3.) After the award in I.D. 31/1988, writ petitioner purchased the factory and its site under three documents executed by third respondent and his relations, the legal heirs of deceased Varghese Daniel, the father of the third respondent. These documents were executed on 6-9-1991,15-11-1991 and 28-6-1992. Pursuant to these sale deeds, writ petitioner appellant was running the factory. While so, on account of the non payment of the amount to the workman covered by the Claim Petition 85/1989 under S.33C(2) of the Act, proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act were initiated. Factory and the stock therein were attached by the revenue authorities. Writ petitioner thereupon approached this Court to quash the proceedings initiated by the revenue authorities under the Revenue Recovery Act and also for a declaration that he is not liable for the amount covered by the award and the order in the Claim Petition passed by the Labour Court, Kollam.