Kerala High Court
Dr. Rony Mathew Kadavil vs Corporation Of Cochin ... on 19 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1942
WP(C).No.7130 OF 2021(M)
PETITIONERS:
1 DR. RONY MATHEW KADAVIL,KADAVIL HOUSE,
27/204, MAVELIPURAM, KAKKANAD 682 030.
2 SHIJI JOSEPH,W/O. DR.RONY MATHEW KADAVIL,
KADAVIL HOUSE, 27/204, MAVELIPURAM,
KAKKANAD 682 030.
BY ADVS.
SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)
SRI.A.R.DILEEP
SRI.P.J.JOE PAUL
SRI.MANU SRINATH
RESPONDENTS:
1 CORPORATION OF COCHIN REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
CORPORATION OF COCHIN, MARINE DRIVE, KOCHI 682 011.
2 THE SECRETARY,CORPORATION OF COCHIN, MARINE DRIVE,
KOCHI 682 011.
3 REVENUE OFFICER, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, MARINE DRIVE,
KOCHI 682 011.
4 ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,CORPORATION OF COCHIN,
ZONAL OFFICE, EDAPPALLY 682 024.
R1-4 BY ADV. SRI.JABARDHANA SHENOY, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.7130 OF 2021(M)
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 19th day of March 2021
On the strength of a building permit dated 28.02.2018
the petitioners constructed a multi storied building in
their property. The building was assessed to tax, which
was duly paid by the petitioners as is evidenced by Exts
P5 and P6 demand notice and receipt. Thereafter, a further
assessment was made resulting in Ext P7 assessment order
and demand. The petitioners allege that the 'further
assessment' was without notice and hearing. The
petitioners apprehend that the assessment as made in Ext
P7 is done treating the terrace portion of the building
also as part of the plinth area. The petitioners have also
been served with Ext P8 provisional order under Section
406 of the Kerala Municipalities Act alleging unauthorized
construction. The petitioners have submitted Ext P9
objections to Exts P7 and P8 wherein, apart from denying
the allegations regarding alleged unauthorized
constructions, they have also sought for regularization of
the violations, if any. It would be sufficient if the
WP(C).No.7130 OF 2021(M)
second respondent considers Ext P9 and passes appropriate
orders.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of
directing the second respondent to consider Ext P9, filed
in reply to Ext P7 assessment and demand and Ext P8
provisional order, and pass appropriate orders after
hearing the petitioners. Needless to say that till orders
are so passed, further proceedings pursuant to Exts. P7
and P8 shall be put on hold.
Sd/-
SATHISH NINAN
JUDGE
vdv
WP(C).No.7130 OF 2021(M)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF BUILDING PERMIT NO.
EYP1/338/COC/EYP/1376/19 DATED
28.02.2018.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF
THE APPROVED PLAN.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF OCCUPANT CERTIFICATE
DATED 27.05.2020 ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF
THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATES
DATED 20.10.2020. ISSUED IN RESPECT OF
THE BUILDING.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICES DATED
20.10.2020 FOR PROPERTY TAX ISSUED IN
RESPECTS OF THE BUILDING.
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF RECEIPTS DATED
27.10.2020 EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF
PROPERTY TAX IN RESPECT OF THE
BUILDING.
EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
01.02.2021 AND THE DEMAND ISSUED THERE
UNDER IN FORM 9.
EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. EYP1-
001389/221 DATED 22.02.2021 ISSUED TO
THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 09.03.2021
SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG
WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIVED
THEREOF.
