🖨️ Print / Download PDF

Anwar M. Easa and Another Vs District Collector, Ernakulam

Case No: Writ Petition (C) No. 12918 of 2008 (K)

Date of Decision: Feb. 2, 2010

Citation: (2010) 2 ILR (Ker) 515 : (2010) 1 KLJ 296 : (2010) 1 KLT 747

Hon'ble Judges: Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J

Bench: Single Bench

Advocate: V.P. Sukumar, for the Appellant; A.J. Varghese (G.P.), for the Respondent

Translate: English | हिन्दी | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | ಕನ್ನಡ | मराठी

Judgement

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.@mdashThe petitioners say that land tax is not being collected from them on grounds referable to the pendency of

revenue recovery proceedings. The collection of revenue is income for the State. There is no inhibition in the law relating to revenue recovery

prohibiting collection of land tax in the name of the Thandaper holder and also issuance of receipts to the person who pays land tax as the receipt

of land tax and the issuance of receipt will, in no way, hinder the revenue recovery proceedings. The question of the Government getting the title

over the property would be only if it purchases the property in revenue auction. If the sale under the Revenue Recovery Act following attachment,

is in favour of a third party, the transfer of title will go accordingly. The mere attachment will not result in an encumbrance which would necessarily

deprive the State of its right to collect land revenue. Under such circumstances there is no reason why land not be collected in relation to the

property in question, in the account of the Thandaper holder. The writ petition is, therefore, ordered directing that without prejudice to revenue

recovery proceedings (Ext.P1) or any other revenue recovery proceedings, the land tax, if any, offered in the name of or on behalf of the

Thandaper account holder, will be collected and receipts issued accordingly. All other issues on merits are left open.