TAHERUNNISA BEGUM Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUDDAPAH DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE these two writ petitions are arising out of identical issues, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) THE petitioner in W. P. No. 18164 of 2000 is the son and the petitioner in W. P. No. 18178 of 2000 is the wife of Ghouse mohiddin, who was declared as revenue defaulter. They call in question the attachment of their houses by the respondents for due recovery of the amount payable by the revenue defaulter under the Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 (for short 'the Act' ).

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner in W. P. No. 18178 of 2000, she purchased the house bearing D. No. 7/264-A situated at Ravindra nagar, Kadapa under a registered sale deed, dated 7-10-1989, for a consideration of Rs. 21. 200/- from one Shaik Ghouse Peera. While so, the Mandal Revenue Officer issued a notice in Ref. /l740/98, dated 16-7-1999, to her husband stating that while he was working as Sub Treasury Officer he misappropriated an amount of Rs. 52,88,390/-and called upon him to pay the said amount. It is also stated that the second respondent issued the notice of attachment and published the same in the District Gazette on 17-8-2000. On coming to know about the same, she submitted a detailed explanation stating that the said house was purchased by her from her own income, and therefore, the same cannot be attached for the alleged amounts due by her husband. it is also stated that she came to know that the first respondent is taking seps to put the said house to auction for realization of the amount alleged to have been misappropriated by her husband. Challenging the same, she filed the above writ petition.