JAYASREE.K Vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHASILDAR & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is a prized subscriber of Chitty, bearing No.44/13 with Chittal No.31 with the second respondent, K.S.F.E., Mavelikkara branch, having a total sala of Rs. 20 lakhs with a duration of 40 months with monthly subscription of Rs. 50,000/- including the dividend. Petitioner has received an amount of Rs. 14 lakhs after deducting 30% Foreman Commission. According to the petitioner, an amount of Rs. 10.5 lakhs was repaid towards chitty amount, evident from Exts.P2 and P3 respectively. Petitioner has also availed a chitty loan bearing No.NCL/1144 on 21.1.2014 for an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs out of the non-prized chitty, having sala of Rs. 10 lakhs and she has remitted 4 installments. In order to receive the aforesaid amounts, petitioner has mortgaged her property, having an extent of 15 cents along with a residential building situated in Re.Sy.No.48/59 of Mavelikkara Village of Mavelikkara Taluk, which, according to the petitioner, is worth more than Rs. 1 crore. Second respondent has issued Exts.P4 and P5 demand notices towards the chitty amount without deducting the amounts paid by the petitioner borne out from Exts.P2 and P3. Now, the respondents have also initiated revenue recovery action as per Sections 7 and 34 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act (for short 'the KRR Act'). It is also the case of the petitioner that without making any attachment as is contemplated under Section 36 of the KRR Act, affixture is made as per Ext.P6, which is not legally permissible and thus seeks appropriate direction to the respondents to remove Ext.P6 and to proceed against the property of the petitioner in accordance with law.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and perused the pleadings and the documents on record.

(3.) The formidable contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no attachment notice issued under Section 36 of the KRR Act and therefore, Ext.P6 affixture made in the property of the petitioner is illegal and therefore, the same is to be removed. I have heard learned Standing Counsel for the respondents in that regard and learned Standing Counsel pointed out that notices under Sections 7 and 34 of the KRR Act is issued, however, a notice under Section 36 is not issued. If that be the situation, I find force in the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, there will be a direction to the respondents to remove the affixture, as is pointed out by the petitioner as per Ext.P6, at the earliest possible time and at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. However, it will not stand in the way of the respondents proceeding against the petitioner in accordance with law and as is contemplated under the provisions of the KRR Act. Be that as it may, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is prepared to pay the outstanding amount in reasonable equated monthly installments, which, according to the petitioner is 15. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that, as on 14.3.2018, an amount of Rs. 21,94,222/- is remaining due from the petitioner with accrued cost and interest. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that petitioner is a surety in yet another chitty transaction, wherein, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that already attachment is affected against the salary of the petitioner and the same is being continued in accordance with law.