T CHITRA Vs. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHEN the Writ miscellaneous petition came up for hearing, having regard to the nature of the relief sought for and the stage of proceedings before the authorities below, it was considered necessary to have the main writ petition itself for hearing and final disposal. The learned counsel appearing on either side had no objection for the said course being adopted 2. The above writ petition has been filed for the following relief "to issue a writ in the nature of writ or mandamus, or any other appropriate writ or order or direction, directing the respondent herein not to bring the petitioner's share of the property in Door Nos. 2 and 3, Krishna Theru in Gandhiji Street No. II, Veerappan Chathiram, Erode for sale in order to recover the arrears of tax that is due from Mr. Thangamani, husband of the petitioner herein, and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case"

(2.) THE respondents have also filed a counter -affidavit. To which a reply has been filed. In view of a development noticed during the course of hearing, I am of the view that it is unnecessary for this Court to adjudicate on the issues raised on behalf of the petitioner as well as the respondent, at this stage

(3.) IN the light of the above, it is for the respondent to call upon the petitioner to produce the necessary materials in terms of the stipulations contained in r. 11 and proceed in the matter further in accordance with law subject to the further rights of the respective parties thereafter. In the light of the above, the TRO shall not proceed with further action for the sale of the property till such time as the adjudication provided for under r. 11 of the Sch. II is undertaken and final orders are passed. Thereupon, the rights of parties shall abide by the orders that may be passed under the said provisions of law. The writ petition shall stand finally disposed of on the above terms. The orders passed in this writ petition shall not preclude the respondent from proceeding against the half share of the husband, if the authority so desires. No costs.