HARADEVI BAI Vs. COLLECTOR OF KURNOOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus to (1) the Collector of Kurnool, (2) The Special Deputy Tahsildar, Kurnool and (3) The Income-tax Officer, Kurnool, restraining them from proceeding to attach or to bring to sale the petitioners properties for the realisation of the alleged income-tax arrears of her husband, Pamandas Suganram, and in particular, from proceeding with the sale of House No. 43/50, Narasingaraopet, Kurnool.

(2.) For the recovery of arrears of income-tax due from the petitioners husband, a certificate was issued by the Income-tax Officer, (the 3rd respondent herein) to the first respondent (the Collector of Kurnool) under Section 46(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act. Pursuant to the certificate issued, the Collector proceeded to attach the aforesaid house for the realisation of the arrears. It is common ground that this house was purchased in the name of the petitioner under a sale deed dated 28-7-1952. It is stated by the Income-tax Officer in his counter-affidavit that the sale was by a debtor of the petitioners husband for discharge of the debt due to him but that it was taken benami in the name of petitioner. It was contended on behalf of the respondents by their learned counsel Mr. C. Kondaiah that if the petitioner was aggrieved it was open to her to institute a suit for a declaration and seek her remedy in the ordinary Courts of law.

(3.) It is stated by the petitioner that during her temporary absence from Kurnool, a notice was affixed to the door of the house seeking to attach the house. The petitioner has not produced that notice before this Court and under the circumstances it is not possible to find under what provision of law the attachment was made.