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

2023 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 72762

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
MUSTHAFA V.K. – Appellant
Versus
COLLECTOR/ AUTHORIZED OFFICER – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Dated this the 05th day of January, 2023 The petitioners availed a cash credit facility, a funded term loan and a housing loan from the 2nd respondent/bank. The petitioners having defaulted repayment towards the loans, the bank initiated SARFAESI proceedings. Simultaneously, revenue recovery proceedings are also initiated for realisation of the amount due under the cash credit facility and the funded term loan. Aggrieved, this writ petition is filed.

2. The records reveal that the revenue recovery proceedings are initiated for realisation of an amount of Rs.41,01,137/-.

3. Being so, the revenue recovery proceedings is per se not maintainable, in view of the settled legal position, as exposited in Sam J Mathews v. Deputy Tahsildar (RR) [2019 (3) KLT 641], that revenue recovery proceedings cannot be initiated for realisation of debts of more than Rs.10 lakhs. On that ground, Exts.P3 and P4 notices are liable to be set aside and I do so. At the same time, since amounts are admittedly due from the petitioners, there cannot be a complete exoneration from repayment.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to pay off the amount dem

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top