Kerala High Court
Sathar A.V vs The District Collector on 21 January, 2013
Author: Antony Dominic
Bench: Antony Dominic
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2013/1ST MAGHA 1934
WP(C).No. 29168 of 2011 (U)
----------------------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------------
SATHAR A.V., S/O.ABDULLA, AGED 42 YEARS,
RESIDING AT `AYSHAS',VALIYANNUR P.O. VARAM,
KANNUR.
BY ADV. SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR.
RESPONDENTS:
------------------------
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR - 670 001.
2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,
(REVENUE RECOVERY),KANNUR - 670 001.
3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
VALIYANNUR VILLAGE,KANNUR - 670 001.
4. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REPRESENTED
BY ITS BRANCH MANGER,KANNUR MAIN BRANCH,PB NO.1,
PLATINUM CENTRE,KANNUR - 670 001.
*ADDITIONAL R.5. IMPLEADED:
5. SRI. ABDUL SATHAR,
ASSIUMA MANZIL,
MOWANCHERY POST,
KANNUR - 670 001.
*IS IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL R.5. AS PER I.A. NO.17800/11 AND ORDER
DTD. 08/11/11.
R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SANJEETHA,
R4 BY ADVS. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN,
SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH,
SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 21-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
Prv.
W.P.(C). NO.29168/2011-U:
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE DTD. 31/03/2011.
EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION TO THE 1ST AND 4TH RESPONDENTS
BY THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
Prv.
ANTONY DOMINIC,J
--------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.29168 of 2011
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of January, 2013
JUDGMENT
On 01.10.2005, the fifth respondent availed a cash credit facility of Rs.2 lakhs from the respondent Bank, to which the petitioner is a guarantor. Default was committed by the fifth respondent and the Revenue Recovery proceedings were initiated by the Bank. It was thereupon, this writ petition has been filed mainly complaining that the Bank is proceeding only against the petitioner.
2. Learned standing counsel for the Bank says that as on 21.09.2010, amount due towards the cash credit facility availed of by the fifth respondent was Rs.3,43,936/-. It is stated that the petitioner is a guarantor and that on account of the default committed by the fifth respondent, Revenue Recovery proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and the fifth respondent.
W.P.(c) No.29168 of 2011 : 2 :
Admittedly, amount is due from the fifth respondent, to which the petitioner is being a guarantor is also liable. In such circumstances, the bank is entitled to proceed against the defaulters. In law, nothing compels the Bank to proceed against all the debtors. Even otherwise, the Bank is proceeding against all the debtors. In such circumstances, there is absolutely no merit in this writ petition.
The writ petition is therefore dismissed.
Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ln