VENKATI GOUD Vs. EXCISE INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMITTEDLY the petitioner is due arrears for the excise year 1970-71. Thepetitioner is one of the partners. The recoveries are being proceeded with by way of arrest of the petitioner keeping him in civil prison, Assailing the legality thereof the writ petition has been Sled. The contention of Sri Dasaratharamaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner is that there are other partners and against them the recoveries are not being proceeded with. There fore the recovery against the petitioner is not according to law. I do not find any force in the contention. Once the petitioner is a debtor it is always open to the creditor to proceed against any one of the joint debtors for recovery of the debt. The law does not compel the creditor to proceed against a particular debtor and recover the amount and thereafter to proceed against others. Under these circumstances I do not find any force in the contention that without proceeding against other partners the recovery proceedings cannot be initiated against the petitioner. it is next contended that the petitioner's immovable property to the extent of 3 acres has already been attached. Without taking recourse to the recovery by sale of that property the recovery by arrest of the petitioner and detention of him in the civil prison is not valid in law. This contention is devoid of any force. The recovery either by sale of the movable or immovable properties or by detention of the debtor in the civil prison is one of the modes of recovery under law and it is not exclusive. It is always alternative. It is open to the creditor to adopt any one of the proceedings available under law. Under those circumstances merely because the property of the petitioner was not proceeded with by way of sale for recovery of the arrears, it cannot take away the power of the creditor to. initiate the proceedings under Section 48 of the Revenue Recovery Act for arrest and detention of the petitioner. Accordingly I find no illegality in the action taken by the respondents. One month's time is granted to the petitioner to pay the arrears. In case he does not pay within this time it is open to the authorities to arrest the petitioner as per law. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Advocate's fee Rs- 350/-.