Sankaran, J.

1. The questions involved in this Writ Appeal are: (1) To attract Section 26-A of the Kerala General Sales Tax, is it necessary that a demand for collection of arrears of Sales Tax be made? (2) Whether the assignees of an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, which transaction is hit by Section 26-A, could claim that they are bonafide transferees so as to avoid the rigour of Section 26-A ? (3) Whether before Revenue Recovery sale, the person in possession could be directed to vacate the house in the property sought to be sold?

2. The parties are referred to hereunder as per their rank in the Writ Petition. The 4th respondent firm, M/s Marvel Industries, is an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. Respondents 5 and 6 are the partners of the firm. The counter affidavit filed by the Assistant Commissioner (law) holding the charge of the Joint Commissioner (Law), Department of Commercial Taxes, in the Writ Appeal reveals that the 4th respondent firm is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 90,91,837/- as Sales Tax for the assessment year 1992-93, penalty of Rs. 41,00,000/- for 1992-93, Rs. 2,51,56,900/- for 1993-94 and penalty of Rs. 2,87,00,000/- for 1993-94.

3. The factory of the 4th respondent was inspected by the Sales Tax officers on 20-4-1993, 22-6-1993,18-8-1993 and 21-1-1994. Proceedings for assessment of Sales Tax were initiated on the basis of the inspection held on 21-1-1994. Notices were issued by the Intelligence Officer to the firm directing them to appear and produce the books of accounts on 21-1-1994, 10-2-1994, 17-2-1994, 3-3-1994, 18-3-1994 and 25-3-1994. They failed to WA.No.1637 of 2007 appear on these dates.

4. The petitioners claim that they are the assignees of properties from respondents 5 and 6. The first petitioner claims that he purchased 2.82 acres of land in May 1994 as per registered assignment deed No. 2870/94. The 2nd petitioner purchased 4.49 acres as per registered document Nos. 2832/94, 2848/94 and 2881/94. The third petitioner is an assignee of an extent of 0.31 acres from the 5th respondent. The assignment deeds referred to above were executed either by the 5th respondent or the 6th respondent on 28-5-1994, 30-5-1994 and 31-5-1994.

5. To recover the Sales Tax arrears from the 4th respondent, Revenue Recovery proceedings were initiated. The properties now claimed by the petitioners were attached. The petitioners filed three suits before the Sub Court, Ottapalam praying for a declaration that the properties are not liable to be proceeded against for recovery of Sales Tax arrears due from the 4th respondent. But those suits were subsequently withdrawn. Thereafter, when the properties were proclaimed for sale, the petitioners filed O.P. No. 23617 of 2002. The said writ petition was disposed of as per Exhibit P1 judgment dated 30-5-2006 directing the Tahsildar to dispose of the claim petitions filed by the petitioners under Section 46 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. The learned Single Judge who disposed of the writ petition held thus:

"The Tahsildar will call for the records from the concerned sales tax authority for verifying the date of inspection of the factory. If he finds that the sale was effected in favour of the petitioners during pendency of any proceedings under the Sales Tax Act including pendency of finalization of any assessment or penalty he will declare the sale deeds subject to Sections 26 A and 26 B, K.G.S.T. Act and proceed to sell the properties by virtue of Section 21 of the K.G.S.T.Act as transaction by partners are also hit by the said Sections of the K.G.S.T.Act."

WA.No.1637 of 2007

6. The Tahsildar heard the petitioners and passed Exhibit P2 order dated 19-9-2006 and rejected the claim made by the petitioners. The Tahsildar held that the sale deeds in favour of the petitioners were executed during the pendency of the assessment proceedings for 1992-93 after the inspection of the factory on 21-1-1994 and therefore the sale deeds under which