Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

K.I.THOMAS, KADANTHODU HOUSE versus THE SALES TAX OFFICER, CHANGANACHERRY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


K.I.THOMAS, KADANTHODU HOUSE v. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, CHANGANACHERRY - OP No. 7453 of 2003(K) [2006] RD-KL 3801 (19 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP No. 7453 of 2003(K)

1. K.I.THOMAS, KADANTHODU HOUSE,
... Petitioner

2. MEERA THOMAS, W/O. K.I.THOMAS,

Vs

1. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, CHANGANACHERRY.
... Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR (RR),

3. SMT. ANNAMMA JOSEPH, KARIMATTOM HOUSE,

4. MARIAMMA SCARIA, KARIMATTOM HOUSE,

5. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

For Petitioner :SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

Dated :19/12/2006

O R D E R

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

.................................................................... O.P. No.7453 of 2003 ....................................................................

Dated this the 19th day of December, 2006.



JUDGMENT

The petitioners are challenging recovery proceedings initiated against the property purchased by them from the third respondent. Government Pleader reported that third respondent's husband was defaulter for sales tax and third respondent is the guarantor. The contention of the petitioners is that the Encumbrance Certificate did not show any liability and therefore, property purchased is free of encumbrance. I am unable to accept this contention because as surety the third respondent is liable for arrears of sales tax due from the defaulter. Respondents 1 and 2 are therefore free to proceed for attachment and sale of the surety's property as surety is equally liable as the defaulter. It is clear that the third respondent was well aware of the liability on the property and if petitioners got cheated in the deal, it is upto them to file criminal complaint against third respondent or to take any action against third respondent. It is open to the petitioners to make any claim petition before the second respondent under Section 46 of the Revenue Recovery Act so that after recovering arrears of sales tax to the extent permitted under the bond if any amount is left on sale of the property, 2 petitioners can claim the same. The O.P. is disposed of as above. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.