Attachment Order Comes To End When Absconder Surrenders, No Hindrance On Sale Of Property Thereafter: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently reiterated that the purpose of attachment of a property would come to an end when the absconder to whom the property belongs, surrenders before the Court. It added that there would thus not be any attachment order in force hindering payment of tax in respect of the property when it is subsequently sold to another. 

While passing the order, Justice Murali Purushothaman, relied upon the decisions in Vimalaben Ajitbhai Patel v. Vatslaben Ashokbhai Patel & Ors. (2008), and Abdul Khadar v. State of Kerala (2015), which had laid down that once the person, against whom the proclamation was issued and whose property was attached, surrenders before the Court and the standing warrants are cancelled, he is no longer an absconder and the purpose of attachment of the property would thus come to an end.

The petitioner had purchased 4.58 Ares of property from one Ummerkoya, in 2005. Pursuant to the purchase of the land, mutation was effected, and tax was paid up to 2011 by the petitioner. However, when the petitioner attempted to remit the land tax for the subsequent period, the Village Officer (2nd respondent herein) refused to accept the same, on the ground that there had been an order of attachment by the Magistrate Court against the property in question, and that the said property had been sold to the petitioner while the attachment order was in force. 

The petitioner objected to the above argument, and approached the High Court against the decision of the Village Officer. 

The Court called for a report from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Parappanagadi as to whether there were any proceedings pending before the Court in this matter. On perusing the report, the Court found that the aforemention Ummer from whom the petitioner had purchased the property, had surrendered before the Court and pleaded guilty. The Magistrate Court had accordingly accepted his plea, and sentenced him to pay fine. 

"The purpose of attachment has thus come to an end and the attachment is automatically lifted. It is pertinent to note that no sale of attached property was conducted under Section 85 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Release, sale and restoration of attached property')," the Court observed. 

It thus declared that there was no attachment in force in respect of the property, and the revenue authorities were directed to accept land tax from the petitioner in respect of the property for the subsequent period. 

The plea was thus disposed. 

Advocates Ansu Varghese, K.J. Joseph, Krishnanunni G.B., and Sunil G.P. appeared on behalf of the petitioner. 

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 538