Wp(C)/23021/2021 Of Surabhi Woods v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-Central

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMASTUESDAY, THE 23 DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1943WP(C) NO. 23021 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: SURABHI WOODS DOOR NO.19/557, 18/558 & 19/559,NEAR RAILWAY STATION, ANGAMALY.P.O, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SHIBU AUGUSTINE.BY ADV L.RAJESH NARAYAN RESPONDENT/S: 1THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL,6TH FLOOR, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN-682011.6TH FLOOR, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN-682011. 2THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER-CENTRAL ,5TH FLOOR, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G.ROAD,5TH FLOOR, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN-682011. 3THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, ERNAKULAM, ALFA LIZA BUILDING, NEAR AMBADY CHAMBERS,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, ERNAKULAM, ALFA LIZA BUILDING, NEAR AMBADY CHAMBERS, OPPOSITE SRV L.P.SCHOOL, CHITTOOR ROAD, KOCHI-682011. 4V.P.RASHEED, AGED 63 YEARSAGED 63 YEARS S/O PAREED KHAN, PROPRIETOR M/S E-ORIENTAL TIMBERS N.H.BYE PASS, OPP.CHAITHANYA MARBLES, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-682024.PASS, OPP.CHAITHANYA MARBLES, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-682024. 5THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK OFFICE, KANAYANNUR, PARK AVENUE, NEAR SUBHASH PARK, MARINE DRIVE, KOCHI-682011. 6THE VILLAGE OFFICER,SAHODARAN AYYAPPAN ROAD,VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM -682019.SAHODARAN AYYAPPAN ROAD,VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM -682019. POONITHURA VILLAGE OFFICE, FIRST FLOOR, ROSY BAZAAR, SRI.JOSE JOSEPH SC R1 TO R4 SRI SUNIL K (R4) GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.THUSHARA JAMES, R5 TO R6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON23.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.=============================== W.P.(C)No.23021 of 2021 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23[rd] day of November, 2021 JUDGMENT Petitioner is a decree holder in OS No.98/2017 before the SubCourt, Ernakulam. The suit was decreed for an amount ofRs.5,59,75,171/-. The judgment debtor is the 4[th] respondent. While thepetitioner initiated proceedings for execution against the 4[th]respondent, it was realised that all properties of the 4[th] respondent areunder attachment with the Income Tax Department. According to thepetitioner, though the liability due to the Income Tax Department wasallegedly around Rs.68 Crores, on a cursory valuation of the propertiesattached, petitioner assumes the same to be having a value of morethan Rs.150 Crores. 2.Petitioner contends that if any item of property is releasedfrom the attachment it can enable the petitioner to proceed inexecution. No prejudice would be caused to the Income TaxDepartment while petitioner could be saved from the threat ofproceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 being initiatedby the Banks. 3.Seeking the release of property or properties fromattachment, petitioner had been knocking at the doors of the 1[st]respondent by filing Ext.P14. However, no response could be elicitedfrom the 1[st] respondent till date and the petitioner apprehendsirreparable hardships to him due to the threat of securitisationproceedings. 4.I have heard Adv.Rajesh Narayanan, learned Counselappearing for the petitioner, Sri.Jose Joseph, learned Standing Counselappearing for respondents 1 to 3, Adv.Sunil.K. learned Counselappearing for the 4[th] respondent and the learned Government Pleaderappearing for respondents 5 and 6. 5.After bestowing my anxious consideration, I am of the viewthat interest of justice demands that the 1[st] respondent consider andpass appropriate orders on Ext.P14 petition filed by the petitioner,seeking release any one or more of the properties sufficient to satisfyhis claim. 4.I have heard Adv.Rajesh Narayanan, learned Counselappearing for the petitioner, Sri.Jose Joseph, learned Standing Counselappearing for respondents 1 to 3, Adv.Sunil.K. learned Counselappearing for the 4[th] respondent and the learned Government Pleaderappearing for respondents 5 and 6. 5.After bestowing my anxious consideration, I am of the viewthat interest of justice demands that the 1[st] respondent consider andpass appropriate orders on Ext.P14 petition filed by the petitioner,seeking release any one or more of the properties sufficient to satisfyhis claim. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1[st] respondent toconsider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P14, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, atany rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copyof this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- jm/ BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE PETITIONER EXHIBITSExhibit P1 Exhibit P2Exhibit P3Exhibit P4Exhibit P5Exhibit P6Exhibit P7 Exhibit P8Exhibit P9 Exhibit P10 Exhibit P11Exhibit P12Exhibit P13Exhibit P14Exhibit P15 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23021/2021 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.06.2017 IN I.A.NO.1880/2017 IN O.S.NO.98/2017 OF THE HON'BLESUB COURT, ERNAKULAM TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF PROPERTIES ATTACHED TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD DATED 4.12.2019 TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION DATED 5.6.2020 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT VERIFYING PROCLAMATIONDATED 11.9.2020 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE PROCLAMATION DATED 11.9.2020 TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE DATED 23.9.2020 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10.9.2021TRUE COPY OF THE GUARANTEE INVOCATION LETTER DATED 30.9.2021 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED OFFICE DATED 30.9.2021 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 23.3.2015TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 23.9.2015TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.9.2016 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 8.10.2020TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTEREST DATED 19.10.2021.