IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 15327 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
MALATHI KONGASSERY
AGED 75 YEARS, W/O. SANKARA NARAYANAN NAIR, MANGAT
HOUSE, MAMMIYUR, GURUVAYOOR P. O., PIN - 680101,
THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE TAHSILDAR
TALUK OFFICE, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR - 680 506.
2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
VILLAGE OFFICE, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR - 680101.
OTHER PRESENT:
ADV. DR. THUSHARA JAMES (SR .GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P (C) No.15327/2022 -2-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this court being aggrieved by Exts.P4 & P5 assessment orders. Exhibit P4 is an assessment order in respect of building tax under the Kerala Building Tax Act and Ext. P5 is a demand for payment of luxury tax under the provisions of the same enactment. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that a residential apartment consisting of different apartments belong to different persons have been assessed as a single unit contrary to various judgments of court. It is also submitted that if assessed individually the apartments being less than 1000 sq.ft., each will not be liable to building tax/luxury tax. It is submitted that Ext.P5 order demanding luxury tax is also bad as the said demand is also based on the fact that the entire building has been taken as one unit. It is pointed out that prior to Exts.P4 and P5 no notice was issued to the petitioner. It is submitted that a notice was admitted by issued only to the husband of the petitioner who expired on 29-04-2021.
2. The learned Government Pleader submits that the petitioner cannot contend that she was not served with a notice as admittedly there was a notice issued to her husband. It is submitted that the petitioner has an effective and alternative remedy against ExtsP4 & P5 and she cannot be heard to contend that she can challenge Exts.P4 & P5 under Article 226 without availing the statutory remedy.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that Exts.P4 and P5 are issued without notice to the W.P (C) No.15327/2022 -3- petitioner, Exts.P4 and P5 will stand quashed with a direction to the 1 st respondent to complete the assessment proceedings with notice to the petitioner. It is open to the petitioner to raise all her contentions before the 1 st respondent. The 1st respondent shall endeavour to complete the proceedings with notice to the petitioner within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE AMG W.P (C) No.15327/2022 -4- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15327/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT FROM THE CHAVAKKAD MUNICIPALITY.
Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE TRIPARTITE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE LANDOWNER, PURCHASER RAVEENDRANATH AND THE BUILDER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, GURUVAYOOR.
Exhibit P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.BT1/51999/2021 DATED 30.03.2022.
Exhibit P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF LUXURY TAX FOR RS.12,500/- FOR THE YEARS 2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23, BT1/51999/2021 DATED 30.03.2022 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.BT1/51999/2021 DATED 17.12.2021.
Exhibit P7 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF THE HUSBAND OF THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P8 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.01.2022 IN WP(C) NO.27236/2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.