Legal representatives continue the persona of the deceased and can be subjected to coercive recovery processes under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act.

1. The question raised in these cases is the same, namely, whether the coercive process of recovery under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act can have operation against the legal represent-a'ives of a deceased person for default occasioned by the deceased In W.A No. 431 of 1974 the question arises in respect of amounts due from the deceased-president of a Co-operative Society, who. it is said, had executed an agreement in respect of the amounts for which the liability was occasioned. After his death, proceedings were taken to recover the amounts due against his legal representatives, namely, wife and children under the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act The contention urged is that under S.2 (e) of the Revenue Recovery Act the term 'defaulter' has been statutorily defined, and the definition would not take in or include a legal representative of the person from whom the amount is due. The definition reads as follows:

'"defaulter' means a person from whom an arrear of public revenue due on land is due, and includes a person who is responsible as surety for the payment of any such arrear;"

The answer to the contention is furnished by a ruling of one of us (myself) in Janaki v. State of Kerala (1976 KLT. 182) that the legal representative in law continues the persona of the deceased. Adverting to the identical argument now advanced before us I stated thus:

"3. The contention of the petitioner was that the petitioner is not a 'defaulter' as defined in the Revenue Recovery Act; that no steps having been taken against the property of the deceased during his life-time, the coercive processes of the Revenue Recovery Act cannot be put into operation against the deceased's property, which had devolved on the petitioner by inheritance; and therefore the proceedings are illegal and void. Reliance was placed on the definition of 'defaulter' under S.2(e) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, as a person from whom an arrear of public revenue due on land is due and as including a person who is responsible as surety for the payment of any such arrear. It was stressed that the absence in the definition, of any mention of legal representative was significant. This was read along with S.68. of the Act, under which, inter alia, all moneys due from any person to the Government under a written agreement executed by him are recoverable as arrears of public revenue. It was contended that S.28 of the Abkari Act authorises only the recovery of arrears of Abkari dues from the person liable to pay the same or his surety.

4, The argument, to my mind, ignores the concept of a legal representative, that, in law be is not a different person from the deceased, but only continues the persona of the deceased. The counter affidavit in Para.3 stated that the petitioner's husband bad executed the necessary agreements but had defaulted payment of kist for the shop, and hence the shop was under departmental management, and a sum of Rs. 11,551.27 was due from him on 1-4-1969. Together with future interest, Revenue Recovery proceedings were taken out in respect of this amount. I do not see any flaw or infirmity in the proceedings thus started Counsel for the petitioners relied upon the decision of a learned judge in Mariam v. Tahasildar, N. Vynad (1969 KLT. 860). which, in its turn relied on an unreported judgment of a learned judge of this Court (as he then was) in O. P. Nos. 1440 and 1957 of 1961. This judgment had been cited before me in the decision in Janaki v. Tahsildar, N. Vynad (1976 KLT. 182) and was distinguished as follows:

"5. Petitioner's counsel relied on the decision in Mariam v. Tahsildar, North Wynad (1969 KLT. 860) and Kunhi Ayisia Umma v. District Collector, Kozhikode (ILR.1974) 2 Kerala 391). It is plain that these cases can have no application. In the first of these, coercive proceedings were sought to be taken out against a person in whom title had become vested by assignment in respect of dues which had accrued against the