( 1 ) THESE writ petitions are directed against the attachment proceedings passed by the Deputy Commercial Tax officer-I, Samarangam Chowk, Vijayawada, the 1st respondent herein, dated 11-10-2000 in Rc. No. B5/57/96. The relevant and necessary facts be noted first as under: the property under attachment by the impugned proceedings is an extent of 430 sq. yards house property being Door No. 1-3-26-12, Municipal Ward No. 1/2 Assessment no. 650/e/2-A, Plot No. 3, situated at vidhyadarapuram village, Vijayawada sub- registry being bounded by - east - Property of Sistla Padmavathi, 81ft. South - Properly of Kolluri Madhusudhan rao and Panduranga Rao, 23-9 ft. West - Remaining House property of kommu Venkateswara Rao, 81ft. North - 15ft. wide road-24 ft. The said property originally belonged to sri Govindarajulu Venkateswara Rao who had purchased it on 26-3-1947 from Malta peda Subbaiah and others. Sri Lakhman rao, his son had constructed a RCC building on the said land. Sri Appana ramalingeswara Rao, partner of M/s. Challamamba Coconut Products and proprietor of M/s. Hindustan Coconut Oil industries purchased an extent of 430 sq. yards and the building from Sri govindarajulu Venkateswara Rao and his children who are the legal representatives of sri Govindarajulu Venkateswara Rao under the registered sale deed dated 17-7-1995. On 7-3-1996, Appana Ramalingeswara Rao, the 4th respondent herein, mortgaged the said property i. e. , 215 sq yards to each of the petitioners as security for a loan of rs. 3,00,000/ -. Subsequently on 2-8-1996, the 4th respondent herein being unable to discharge the loan sold the property to the petitioners and delivered possession of the same in consideration of the full discharge of the loan amount with interest.

( 2 ) M/s, Challamamba Coconut products is a dealer registered under the a. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (the Act, for "brevity") in which the 4th respondent herein is a partner. The 4th respondent is also the proprietor of M/s. Hindustan coconut Oil Industries. The demand notices for payment of tax were served on the said firms on the following dates: m/s. Challamamba Coconut Products year of Asst. Date of passing of the asst. order date of service of the order amount of the asst. 1993-94 (CST) (Rev. by DC) 1994-95 (APGST) 27-3-1997 31-1-1998 27-1-1996 16-7-1997 31-8-1998 16-7-1991 jk. 6122/-Rs. 30565/-Rs. 4332/- 1994 -. 95 (CST) 1995-96 (APGST) 1995-96 (CST) 10-3-1999 16-7-1991 22-3-1999 64-2000 rs. 58087/-Rs. 839847/- rs. 10218/- m/s. Hindustan Coconut Oil Industries 1993-94 11-2-1998 15-6-1998 (APGST)

( 3 ) WHEN the matters stood thus on 24-6-1999 notices of attachment of the property were issued purported to be under section 27 of the Andhra Pradesh Revenue recovery Act, 1864 (for short, Revenue recovery Act") and the same were published in the Krishna District Gazette No. 63, dated 24-6-1999. The petitioners then filed wp Nos. 23293 of 1999 and 23297 of 1999 and challenged the attachment orders. This court, by its final order dated 2-2-2000, disposed of the said writ petitions observing that the matter was pre-judged by the deputy Commercial Tax Officer, the first respondent herein, without hearing the petitioners. The Court directed the first respondent to afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners after fixing a date of hearing. In response to that direction a notice was issued by the 1st respondent and the petitioners filed their objections on 3-8-2000. Thereafterwards the 1st respondent passed the impugned proceedings on 11-10-2000. Hence these writ petitions assailing the validity of the same.

( 4 ) SRI S. Krishna Murthy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners while assailing the impugned attachment notices would first contend that the impugned attachment notices were issued under section 27 of the Revenue Recovery Act read with Section 17-C of the APGST Act and these provisions enable the 1st respondent to attach only a property belonging to the defa