ABDUL RAHMAN B.A v. P.M.BABU
Judgment
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2007 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1929 Con.Case(C).No. 1581 of 2007(S) ------------------------------- PETITIONER/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------ABDUL RAHMAN B.A., AGED 50 YEARS,SANA TOWERS, DEVAGIRI,MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.S.VIDYASAGAR RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------P.M.BABU, AGE AND FATHER'S NAMENOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE,KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P.PRADEEP THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.....................................................................C.O.C.
No.1581 of 2007....................................................................Dated this the 19th day of November, 2007.JUDGMENTThe contempt case is filed stating that judgment is not complied withby the Tahsildar. Government Pleader has filed a statement stating thatpetitioner is given detailed statement of balance liability. So far asinstalment facility granted by the Government is concerned, the saidGovernment order cannot be enforced because petitioner had availedprevious instalment facility and defaulted payment. The later order makesit clear that the order need be followed only if no instalment facility wasgranted earlier. Counsel for the petitioner however stated that theadjustment of interest is not in accordance with the statutory provisions.
Ifinterest charged is wrong, petitioner can request for rectification ofadjustment and if application is filed, there will be direction to the Tahsildarto verify statutory provisions and charge interest only for the period ofdefault. The decision of the Tahsildar not to grant instalment facility onceagain is upheld because Government Order itself is conditional. Contemptcase is therefore closed. However, Tahsildar should issue order onpetitioner's application for rectification with regard to interest. If petitioner 2has grievance, petitioner can challenge the said order in fresh proceedings.Since instalment facility is not granted, petitioner is granted time till31.1.2008 to make payment, failing which full amount will be recoveredthrough revenue recovery proceedings.C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudgepms
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.