Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 74295
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Viju Abraham, J
Abhilash S. V. – Appellant
Versus
Canara Bank – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 22477 OF 2022
Important Points
Subject
Civil Law - Revenue Recovery
Act Referred
Headnote
For the Appellants/Petitioners: B. J. John Prakash, P. Pramel, Harishma, Ashik Toms, Celine John, Ramseena N.
For the Respondents: M. Gopikrishnan Nambiar, Government Pleader, K. John Mathai, Joson Manavalan, Kuryan Thomas, Paulose C. Abraham, Raja Kannan, Akhila Nambiar
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revenue recovery proceedings exceeding twenty lakh rupees are legally impermissible. (Para 1 , 2) |
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
VIJU ABRAHAM,J
-------------------
WP(C).No.22477 of 2022
-------------------------------
Dated this the 29th day of October, 2025
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P2 notice, whereby proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act was initiated. The petitioner, relying on the judgment in Sam J Mathews and Others v. Deputy Tahsildar(RR) Taluk Office, Thalappally, Trichur and Others 2019 (4) KHC 105 submits that since dues are over Rs.20 lakhs, the Revenue Recovery Proceedings cannot be initiated.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank does not dispute the said legal position.
Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances, I am inclined to set aside Ext.P2 notice. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed.
pm
