P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
K. Abdul Basheer – Appellant
Versus
District Collector, Kannur – Respondent
1. Can the District Collector, in exercise of the power under the proviso to Section 54 of the Revenue Recovery Act, set aside the sale once the sale is confirmed, is the point of dispute.
2. An extent of 0.0324 hectares of land and building situated thereon, belonging to the 5th respondent, was subjected to revenue sale for realisation of amount due to the 4th respondent under a housing loan. The petitioner participated in the sale and turned to be the successful bidder, who remitted 15% of the bid amount of Rs.50,000/-on the same day, i.e. on 30.03.2006. The balance amount was satisfied within 30 days, as prescribed under Section 49(3) of the Revenue Recovery Act, as borne by Ext. P1 receipt. Since there was no complaint from any corner (as no objection was filed either under Section 52 or Section 53 of the Revenue Recovery Act, seeking to set aside the sale), further steps were pursued and the sale was confirmed in the name of the petitioner, as per Ext.P2 order dated 28.03.2007 passed by the 2nd respondent.
3. Quite after one year of confirmation of sale, as above, the petitioner was served with Ext.P3 notice dated 03.05.2008 issued by the first respondent, referring
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.