MATHEW JOSEPH Vs. TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants challenged Exts. P2, P2(a) and P2(b) notices issued under the Kerala Revenue recovery Act in the Original Petition filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India. The learned single Judge dismissed the Original Petition.

(2.) A loan was availed by the appellants from Canara Bank. Vythiri Branch. Amounts are due to the Bank and it is not disputed. The contention raised by the appellants is that the loan was availed in the year 1985 and the revenue recovery proceedings were initiated only in 1999 and therefore, the revenue recovery proceedings are not legal as barred by limitation. The appellants relied on the decision in State of Kerala and others v. V. R. Kalliyanikutty and another ( 1999 (3) SCC 657 ). The Bank contended that there was acknowledgment of the debt as evidenced by Ext. R2 series of acknowledgments and. Therefore, recovery of the loan is not barred by limitation. The learned single Judge held that there was valid acknowledgment and, therefore, the plea of limitation is not sustainable.

(3.) In 1999 (3) SCC 657, it was held thus: