Case Law › High Court › N.sesha Ratna Kumari Wife Of Ramaseshaia...

N.sesha Ratna Kumari Wife Of Ramaseshaiah v. The Tax Recovery Officer, Income Tax Department, Vijayawada Andothers

High Court 09 Aug 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
N.sesha Ratna Kumari Wife Of Ramaseshaiah v. The Tax Recovery Officer, Income Tax Department, Vijayawada Andothers
Date of order
09 Aug 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In N.sesha Ratna Kumari Wife Of Ramaseshaiah v. The Tax Recovery Officer, Income Tax Department, Vijayawada Andothers, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

THE HONOURBALE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WP NO.14223 OF 2004 Between: N.Sesha Ratna Kumari wife of Ramaseshaiah .…petitioner Vs. The Tax Recovery Officer, Income Tax Department, Vijayawada andothers …Respondents THE HONOURBALE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMWP NO.14223 OF 2004 ORAL ORDER The writ petition is directed against the alleged inaction of therespondents in delivering possession of the land to the petitioner’shusband as per the auction held on 19-03-1996 and for a consequentdirection to the respondents to deliver possession of the land to theextent of Ac.2.29 cents in R.S.No.371/4,474 of Kesarapalli Village,Gannavaram Taluq, Vijayawada while paying penal interest @ 24%upon the amount paid by the petitioner’s husband in 1986. The 1[st] respondent has filed a counter-affidavit stating that anextent of Ac.2.29 cents in R.S.No.468/2 (and not R.S.No.371/4, 471 asasserted in the writ petition) of Kesarapalli village, Gannavaram Taluq,Vijayawada was auctioned by the Income Tax Department inconnection with the recovery of the Income Tax outstanding arrears ofSri Verapaneni Sreeramamurthy, and the petitioner’s husband lateNutakki Ramaseshaiah was the highest bidder and the bid amountwas paid by him. Responding to the complaint of the petitioner that possession isnot delivered, the counter-affidavit states that soon after the money istransferred to the account of the respondents the sale certificate will beissued in favour of the petitioner in respect of the land. In view of this assertion by the 1[st] respondent no furtherproceedings are warranted. The writ petition is accordingly disposedof. No order as to costs. 9[th] AUGUST 2007*TSNR _________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan