An important question of law arises for decision in this revision petition as to whether the abkari arrears due from a person who had suffered a mortgage decree in another suit is public revenue due on land as defined in Sections 2(a) and 2(j) of the Kerala revenue Recovery Act. If so, whether such arrears shall be the first change on the mortgage property under Section 3 of the Act. In other words, can the state’s right to realize abkari arrears could, take precedence over the Bank’s right to enforce its security, the bank being a secured creditor. What is the impact of Section 2(a) read with Section 3 of the said Act and whether the said provisions gives a statutory recognition to the doctrine of the State’s priority for recovery of abkari arrears is the crux of the dispute.

2. The state of Kerala represented by the District Collector, Ernakulam and the Tahsildar Muvattupuzha are the revision petitioners. The order passed by the Subcourt Muvatupuzha dated 23.2005 in E.A. 578/1996 in E.P 122/1993 in O.S. 469/1985 is under challenge. The said E.A. was filed by the revision petitioners for a declaration that the property put to sale in execution belongs to the State of Ker