Molly Thomas vs the District Collector

Molly Thomas vs The District Collector

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 10, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1443078

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1443078
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice V.G.Arun
Decided On: Jun 10, 2022
Case Number: WP(C)/1434/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Molly Thomas

Respondent

The District Collector

Excerpt

.....rs.51,000/-. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will remit the amount within two weeks, but the revenue recovery proceedings initiated on the basis of a wrong computation has to be quashed. accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as under; i. ext.p1 revenue recovery notice is quashed. ii. the petitioner shall remit the balance overdue amount of rs.51,000/- within two weeks. iii. the loan account shall be regularised on such payment. iv. the petitioner shall pay the balance monthly installments without default. v. if the above conditions are not complied with, the bank can continue the recovery proceedings. sd/- v.g.arun judge nb/10-6 appendix of wp(c) 1434/2022 petitioner exhibits exhibit p1 true copy of the demand notice dated 10.1.2022 issued by the 2nd respondent under section 7 of the revenue recovery act. exhibit p1(a) true copy of the demand notice dated 10.1.2022 issued by the 2nd respondent under section 34 of the revenue recovery act. exhibit p2 true copy of the statement of accounts issued by the 4th respondent dated 20/1/2022 exhibit p3 true copy of the receipt dated 23/3/2022 issued by the 4th respondent. exhibit p4 true copy of the reply dated 25.05.2022 issued by the 4th respondent under right to information act. exhibit p5 true copy of the demand notice dated 25.05.2022 issued by the 4th respondent. respondents exhibits: nil true copy p.a. to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1944 PETITIONER: MOLLY THOMAS AGED 51 YEARS W/O. THOMAS K. C., KOCHUPURAKKAL HOUSE, MUTHOLI P. O., PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686573. BY ADV THOMSTINE K.AUGUSTINE RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM - KUMILY ROAD, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686002. 2 THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR MEENACHIL TALUK, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, MEENACHIL P. O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686575. 3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER PULIYANNUR VILLAGE, PULIYANNUR P. O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686503. 4 UNION BANK OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, OPP. MINI CIVIL STATION, MOOND BUILDING, PALA BRANCH, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686575.
BY ADVS. SRI. RIYAL DEVASSY, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. A.S.P.KURUP, STANDING COUNSEL-R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 10th day of June, 2022 The writ petition is filed challenging the revenue recovery proceedings initiated for realisation of the defaulted loan amount due to the 4 th respondent bank.

2. The primary contention is that the

computation, based on which the revenue recovery proceedings was initiated, is wrong and, if proper calculation is made, the liability will come down substantially.

3. While granting an interim order, this Court had directed the petitioner to remit Rs.2 lakh. The petitioner has complied with the condition.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for the Bank

submitted that the balance amount due as on date is only Rs.51,000/-. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will remit the amount within two weeks, but the revenue recovery proceedings initiated on the basis of a wrong computation has to be quashed. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as under; i. Ext.P1 revenue recovery notice is quashed. ii. The petitioner shall remit the balance overdue amount of Rs.51,000/- within two weeks. iii. The loan account shall be regularised on such payment. iv. The petitioner shall pay the balance monthly installments without default. v. If the above conditions are not complied with, the Bank can continue the recovery proceedings. Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE NB/10-6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1434/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 10.1.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT. EXHIBIT P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 10.1.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 20/1/2022 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 23/3/2022 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 25.05.2022 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 25.05.2022 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties Molly Thomas vs The District Collector Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice V.G.Arun