WP(C)/45540/2024 of SONY C. S., Vs THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, on 8 April 2025

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the beneficiary of an award in OP(MV)No.150/2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur. According to the petitioner, Revenue Recovery proceedings were initiated against the property belonging to respondent Nos.1 and 3 to 6 in Ext.P1 award and amount of Rs.15,60,000/- was received. It is the case of the petitioner that there was a shortfall in the payment to the petitioner and the petitioner is entitled to receive a further amount of Rs.1,09,628/-. It is the case of the petitioner that the amount obtained by sale of the immovable property has been paid to the petitioner after deduction of Revenue Recovery charges and if the Revenue Recovery charges of Rs.1,08,778/- (the deducted amount) is also paid to the petitioner, the entire claim of the petitioner will be settled. It is the case of the petitioner that the Revenue Recovery charges are to be recovered from the defaulting party and not from the petitioner.

2. The learned Government Pleader has filed a statement. Paragraph 4 of the statement reads thus:- “4. As per the request from the requisitioning authority, the District Collector,

Malappuram issued Revenue Recovery Certificate in Form-25 under Sec. 69(3) of Kerala Revenue Recovery Act [KRR Act], 1968 and authorized Tahsildar, Ponnani to realize the said amount from the defaulters hence Deputy Tahsildar (RR) Ponnani had issued notices under sec.7 and 34 of KRR Act 1968 to the defaulters. As the defaulters were not ready to clear the dues, attachment order were issued on 09.10.2023, over 0.0324 Hectors of land with the improvements and structures thereof comprise in Sy.No 126/7 of Kololambu amsom pookkarathara Desam in Edappal Village, possessed by Sri Abdul Rahim, Sri Abdul Razak, Smt.Rajeena, Sri Rajab & Sri Sharafudheenmm Kurinjilayil (H), Pookarathara and issued Form No.11 as per Section 36 against the defaulters. The defaulters took no steps to settle the dues. Hence the sale notice in Form-16 under Sub Section 2 of Section 49 was issued and served to the defaulters and published as per Rules. The sale was fixed on 09.10.2023 and one Sri.Muhammed Afsal S/o Abdullakutty, Kodakkattu Valappil has purchased the property for 15,60,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Lakh and Sixty Thousand only). Part of an amount to the tune of Rs. 2,34,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Thirty four Thousand) on the same day and Rs. 13,26,000 (Rupees Thirteen Lakh Twenty Six Thousand) paid on 12.10.2023. The Amounts are deposited in the revenue deposit account in the name of Tahsildar, Ponnani in a timely manner.

Then submit the bid to the sub-collector, Tirur for verification. The sub-collector, Tirur has confirmed the sale in his

Order

No.RDOTIR/2909/2023-J1

Dated.17.03.2024. Details of the amounts recovered from the judgment debtors are given in the schedule below:”

Date of receipt of requisition (Form-

05.09.2021

Date of issuance of RRC (Form-25) 08.09.2021

Amount due from the debtor as per Requisition RRC No.2021/5252 13,40,612/-

Interest at the rate of 8% p.a from the date of issuance of RRC till the date of auction (for 751 days) 2,20,668/-

Total (3+4) 15,61,280/-

The amount received on sale of movable property nil

The amount received on auction of immovable property 15,60,000/-

Demand Notice Fee (DNF) 850/-

Amount after deducting DNF (7-8) 15,59,150/-

Collection charge 1,08,778/-

Amount given to requisition authority (9-10) 14,50,372/-

Balance arrear amount to be collected as per requisition (5-11) 1,10,908/-” It is clear from the statement that a sum of Rs.1,08,778/- was deducted from the amount received by sale of immovable property and the balance of Rs.14,50,372/- (after deducting the Demand Notice Fee of Rs.850/- also) was remitted to the requisitioning authority. It is also clear that the balance arrear amount to be collected as per requisition is Rs.1,10,908/-.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and having considered the averments in the statement filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, I am of the view that there is considerable merit in the contention taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to the entire amount payable to him in terms of the award and the amount of Revenue Recovery charges have to be recovered from the assets of the defaulters. It is also clear from the statement filed by the 2nd respondent that Revenue Recovery proceedings have not been culminated and are continuing to recover the balance amount due from the defaulters. In the above circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing that the respondents shall continue with the Revenue Recovery proceedings against the defaulters and if within a period of three months from today, the balance amount to be recovered is not so recovered, an amount of Rs.1,09,628/- shall be paid over to the petitioner from out of the collection charges retained as per the statement filed by the 2nd respondent. I make it clear that even if the continuation of Revenue Recovery proceedings don’t result in recovery from the defaulters within the aforesaid period of three months, it will be open to the

respondents to continue with recovery proceedings to recover the entire amounts due to the respondents as collection charges under the Revenue Recovery Act. It is made clear that if the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,09,628/- is paid within the aforesaid period of three months, the petitioner will not be entitled to any further interest on the said amount. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 45540/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD OP(MV) NO.150/2009 DATED 12/03/2018 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. 366515/2024 DATED 15.04.2024 RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R2 (a): A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUISION RECEIVED FOR MACT, THRISSUR