Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 809 Ker
Judgement Date : 8 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 18TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.603 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
SRI. BINNY ITTY,
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O. ITY, MANAGING PARTNER, M/S. CRYSTAL DEPARTMENT, CSI
COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, BAKER JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM 686 001. NOW
RESIDING AT THANNIKKAL HOUSE, GOVINDAPURAM KARA, , KOTTAYAM
686 001.
BY ADVS.
SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER
SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN
SRI.PIOUS MATHEW
SRI.ROY JOSEPH
SMT.ANIES MATHEW
SRI.E.HARIDAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE (S) DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, GOVERNMENT PRESS P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE ROAD, KOTTAYAM, SECOND FLOOR, MINI CIVIL
STATION, UNION CLUB ROAD, PUTHENANGADY, KOTTAYAM,
KERALA 686 001.
3 THE TAHSILDAR,
TALUK OFFICE KOTTAYAM, FIRST FLOOR, MINI CIVIL STATION, UNION
CLUB ROAD, PUTHENANGADY, KOTTAYAM, KERALA 686 001.
4 VILLAGE OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE VILLAGE OFFICE KOTTAYAM, THIRUNAKARA,
KOTTAYAM P.O. KERALA 686001.
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT. THUSHARA JAMES - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.603 OF 2021
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court impugning
Ext.P9 on various grounds, but primarily that he was not heard
before it was issued and that it has been framed in violation of
Explanation 2 to Section 2 (e) of the Kerala Building Tax Act.
2. In response to the afore submissions made on behalf
of the petitioner by his learned counsel, Sri.Julian Xavier, the
learned Government Pleader, Smt.Thushara James, pointed out
that, as is recorded in Ext.P9, even though the petitioner was
given sufficient opportunity by the Tahsildar for being heard, he
had refused to avail the same. She submitted that therefore, the
Tahsildar had no other option but to issue Ext.P9. As an
alternative submission, the learned Government Pleader
submitted that if this Court is inclined in favour of the
petitioner, then he may be directed to appear before the
Tahsildar, so that the said Authority can take a fresh decision as
per law without any avoidable delay.
3. On hearing Smt.Thushara James as afore, the
learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Julian Xavier, submitted
that his client is willing to appear before the Tahsildar on any WP(C).No.603 OF 2021
date that this Court may fix and that therefore, this writ petition
may be ordered setting aside Ext.P9 and directing the said
Authority to take a fresh decision on his claims.
4. When I consider the afore submissions, it is without
doubt that Ext.P9 records that the petitioner was offered at least
two opportunities of being heard but that he had not availed of
the same. Normally, therefore, this Court would not have been
inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner but since Sri.Julian
Xavier submits that Ext.P9 also suffers from statutory
infirmities, which can be pointed out by his client, I deem it
appropriate that the petitioner be given an opportunity of
impelling his contentions before the Tahsildar.
5. For the afore reasons, I order this writ petition and
set aside Ext.P9, not because I have found against it
affirmatively, but to pave way for a fresh consideration of the
assessment by the Tahsildar in terms of law, after hearing the
petitioner also.
Resultantly, I direct the petitioner to mark appearance in
the office of the 3rd respondent - Tahsildar at 11.00 a.m. on
19.01.2021, so that the said Authority can hear the petitioner on WP(C).No.603 OF 2021
that day or fix a suitable day for hearing, leading to an
appropriate fresh assessment in terms of the Kerala Building
Tax Act to be issued, as expeditiously as is possible.
Needless to say, since I have not considered any of the
contentions of the petitioner on its merits, the petitioner will be
at liberty to pursue all of them before the Tahsildar and the said
Authority will consider the same while issuing appropriate
orders in terms of these directions.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
SD/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
rp JUDGE
WP(C).No.603 OF 2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT DATED 4.8.2011.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ONE SUCH DEED EXECUTED BY THE
PETITIONER AND THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY IN THE NAME OF THAMPY CHERIYAN AND ESTHER THAMPY CHERIYAN DATED 23.3.2018.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT ISSUED IN FORM V UNDER KERALA BUILDING TAX ACT, DATED 24.3.2018 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE LAND OWNERS WHEREIN CRYSTAL APARTMENTS VALE VIEW RESIDENCY SITUATES.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 24.3.2018 IN FORM NO. IV. ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE LAND OWNERS.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE LAND OWNERS.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 21.2.2019 FILED BY ONE OF THE LAND OWNERS BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.1.2020 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.3.2020 IN WPC NO. 5869/2020.
EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.8.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!