Proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act cannot initiate claims for time-barred debts.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner had availed an agricultural loan from the erstwhile Kasaragod district Co-operative Bank. According to the petitioner, the loan was availed on 26.07.1999. It is contended that after a long lapse of 15 years, Exts.P4 and P5 notices were issued under the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890. It is contended that the revenue recovery proceedings are barred by limitation. It is submitted that going by the law laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Kerala v. V.R.Kalliyanikutty , 1999 KHC 297 , revenue recovery proceedings cannot be initiated to recover time-barred debts. The petitioner filed objections to the revenue recovery proceedings. However, without considering the same, when attachment was levied on the property of the petitioner, he approached this Court by filing W.P(C)No.14647 of 2023, which was disposed of by Ext.P8 judgment directing the 1^st respondent to consider Ext.P6 objections and pass orders thereon. According to the petitioner, the 1^st respondent thereafter passed Ext.P10 order without considering the objections raised by the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that against Ext.P10, the petitioner preferred Ext.P11 before the 6^th respondent (Government). It is stated that the remedy of the petitioner against Ext.P10 was to file a revision before the Land Revenue Commissioner, and by mistake the petitioner preferred Ext.P11 before the 6^th respondent (Government).

2. When this matter is taken up for consideration today, it is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the 6th respondent (Government) to forward Ext.P11 to the competent authority, namely, the 7^th respondent and to further direct the 7^th respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P11 as a revision filed before him.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents, and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5, and considering the limited nature of relief now sought for by the petitioner, this writ petition will stand disposed of, directing the 6^th respondent to forward Ext.P11 for consideration by the 7^th respondent. Since it is stated that Ext.P11 was filed before the 6th respondent within the time prescribed for filing a revision petition, it is further directed that, on receipt of Ext.P11 from the 6^th respondent, the 7^th respondent shall consider and dispose of Ext.P11 in accordance with the law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 4^th respondent, treating Ext.P11 as a revision petition filed before him for all purposes. The recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner shall remain suspended till Ext.P11 petition is heard and decided by the 7^th respondent.

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-