MOHAMMED AKBAR v. INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directingthe 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directingthe 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 delaycondonation application after affording an opportunity of hearingto the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a periodof one month from the date of receipt…
Judgment
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.-------------------------------------------W.P.(C).No.36772 of 2010-------------------------------------------Dated this the 10th day of December, 2010J U D G M E N T----------------------Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment thepetitioner had preferred statutory appeal before the 2ndrespondent as evidenced from Ext.P3. The appeal was filedalong with Ext.P4 petition seeking condonation of delay. Along with the appeal the petitioner had also filed staypetition as evidenced from Ext.P5, as well as a petitionseeking urgent hearing as per Ext.P6. It is submitted that theappeal and accompanying applications are pendingconsideration and disposal before the 2nd respondent. Grievance of the petitioner is that without consideringpendency of the statutory appeal, recovery steps has nowbeen initiated pursuant to Ext.P7 notice issued under theprovisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968. Hencethe petitioner seeks direction to restrain recovery steps tillthe disposal of the appeal.
Considering pendency of the statutory appealbefore the authority concerned, I am of the view that the writ W.P.(C).36772/10-2-petition can be disposed of directing that authority to expeditesteps for disposal of the matter.
Operative part
Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directingthe 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 delaycondonation application after affording an opportunity of hearingto the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a periodof one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the delay is condoned and appeal is registered, then the 2ndrespondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 staypetition, simultaneously.
Till such time orders are passed by the 2nd respondentas directed above, recovery of amounts covered under Ext.P1,which is now initiated pursuant to Ext.P4 notice, shall be kept inabeyance.
The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgmentbefore the 2nd respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.okb
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directingthe 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 10 Dec 2010. The bench was C K ABDUL REHIM.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.