(1.) The challenge in this writ petition is against the order of the Special Deputy Tahsildar (Revenue Recovery), restraining the petitioners from operating their bank account. By the impugned order issued under Ss. 19 and 80 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Manager of the Bank in which the petitioners are maintaining their account is also directed to recover the amount mentioned in the order from the petitioners' account and credit that amount to the account of the Special Deputy Tahsildar (RR). The order is issued at the instance of the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Limited ('KSFE' for short) from which the petitioners had availed loan and defaulted repayment.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the loan is fully secured by mortgaging landed property as security and hence, the remedy of the KSFE is to proceed against that property. It is then contended that the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act does not empower the Tahsildar to freeze the borrower's account. In support of the argument, reference is made to the Handbook of Schemes published by the KSFE and the observations of the Apex Court in Kesari Nandan Mobiles vs. Office of Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (2), Enforcement Divison-5 [2025 INSC 983] that attachment of bank accounts is a draconian measure.
(3.) Learned Standing Counsel for the KSFE submitted that the extreme measure of freezing petitioners' bank account was taken since they had deliberately defaulted repayments and refused to respond to the revenue recovery notices. It is contended by the learned counsel that, as per Sec. 5, arrears of public revenue due on land can be recovered by attachment and sale of the defaulter's movable property and money in the bank being movable property, can be attached under Sec. 8 and also by resorting to Sec. 19 of the Act. It is also contended that money in a bank account is not excluded from attachment under Sec. 9 of the Act.