V SANAL KUMAR PRANAVAM Vs. MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the recovery proceedings initiated against the property of the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner filed the above writ petition contending that Exhibit P1 is a notice issued in the year 2013, wherein the petitioner's property was proceeded against for recovery of sales tax dues as also for default in a Bank loan. One of the properties which was notified for sale, was sold and the entire amounts due to the Sales Tax Department is cleared. So much is clear from Exhibit P2.

(3.) The proceedings against the other property, for satisfaction of the Bank loan, were initiated, as is evident from Exhibit P4. The petitioner assails the same, on the ground that, in the earlier sale an amount of more than Rupees Fourteen Lakhs was credited to the Bank loan account after clearing the dues to the Sales Tax Department. In such circumstances, the amount could not have risen upto Rupees Twenty Lakhs, is the essential contention.