SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(Ker) 161

Judges : K.BHASKARAN,BHASKARAN NAMBIAR
KADEEJA BEEVI - Appellant
Versus
KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION - Respondent
Case No : O.P. No. 9410 of 1984-M
Decided On : 06/26/1985
Advocates Appeared :
P.P. Thomas Mathews P. Mathew. K P. Vijayan. For Petitioner P K. Alexander Vydian & Government Pleader For Respondents

The government was not entitled to claim collection charges under R.5(1) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Rules in the absence of actual collection of arrears on behalf of the institution notified under S.71 of the Act.

Headnote:

Revenue Recovery Charges - Kerala Revenue Recovery Act - The court held that the government was not entitled to claim collection charges as no collection of arrears had been made on behalf of the institution notified under S.71 of the Act. The provisions of R.5(1) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Rules were not applicable in the absence of actual collection of arrears.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner had borrowed a certain amount from the 1st respondent, Kerala Financial Corporation. The government issued a notification to recover revenue recovery charges, but the petitioner had already discharged the entire amount due to the Financial Corporation.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the government was not entitled to claim collection charges as no collection of arrears had been made on behalf of the institution notified under S.71 of the Act. The court directed not to collect the sum stated to be 'Revenue Recovery Commission' and to refund the amount to the petitioner if already paid under protest.

Issues: The issue was whether the government was entitled to claim collection charges under R.5(1) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Rules despite no actual collection of arrears.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of R.5(1) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Rules were not applicable in the absence of actual collection of arrears under the provisions of the Act on behalf of the institution notified under S.71.

Final Decision: The court directed not to collect the sum stated to be 'Revenue Recovery Commission' and to refund the amount to the petitioner if already paid under protest. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs.

Judgment :-

1. The petitioner had borrowed certain amount from the 1st respondent. the Kerala Financial Corporation. The Government have issued Exi.P-5 notification in exercise of the powers conferred under S.71 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. 1968. It is the admitted case that the entire amount due to the Financial Corporation has been discharged by the petitioner.

2. What is sought to be recovered under Ext. P-7 letter is a sum of Rs.60.957.87 which is alleged to represent revenue recovery charges. alleged to be due to Government. The respondents have no case that any amount was collected in proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act All the same. the contention of the 2nd respondent Government was that by virtue of the provisions contained in R.5(1) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Rules. 1968. the Government was entitled to collect revenue recovery charges at the rate of 5 percent on the amount collected; and accordingly. the 1st respondent Corporation has been directed to remit the amount inasmuch as Revenue Recovery proceedings had already been initiated for the recovery of the amount due from the petitioner to the Corporation. R.5(1) of the Rules reads as follows:

"5. (1) Collection charges at the rate of 5 percent of the arrears collected under the provisions of the Act on behalf of any institution notified under S.71 shall be realised from such institutions".

In our view. the question of Revenue Recovery commission or collection charges could and would arise only where there is collection of arrears under the provisions of the Act on behalf of any institution notified under S.71 of the Act. Inasmuch as the admitted case is that no such collection has been made. we do not think that a stage has been reached where the Government would be entitled to claim collection charges by virtue of the provisions contained in R.5(1) of the Rules This position is made further clear from the provisions of sub-rule (2) of the above rule which says

"(2) The collection charges shall be deducted from the amount recovered and the balance alone shall be payable to the institution."

There will. therefore. be a direction not to collect from the petitioner the sum of Rs. 60.957.87 stated to be "Revenue Recovery Commission" in Ext. P-7. and in the event of the petitioner having paid that amount under protest. to refund that amount to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.

No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top