The court emphasized the need for document verification before proceeding with revenue recovery actions against property ownership claims.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner claims to be the owner of 1.19 Ares of property situated in Survey No.33/3-16 of Azhikod Village, Eriyad Panchayat in Kodungallur Taluk along with a residential building on it. The said property was purchased by the petitioner as per Ext.P1 sale deed on 30.03.2017. According to the petitioner, after effecting transfer of registry and regularly remitting the land tax, he realised that revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated on his property on account of a liability allegedly due from the 5^th respondent. Petitioner questions the said revenue recovery proceedings being initiated against his property. Ext.P6 is a petition filed by him questioning the proceedings initiated against the petitioner's property on account of the liability due from the 5^th respondent. The limited relief now sought for by the petitioner is for a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the said petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader.

3. Since the claim of the petitioner requires verification of documents including the document that had created the alleged liability, as well as the document of title of the property of the petitioner, I am of the view that Ext.P6 petition can be directed to be disposed of.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6 petition, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Needless to mention, the coercive proceedings initiated as per Ext.P5, against the petitioner's property, will be kept in abeyance till a decision is taken, as directed above.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-