Ummathu Mol vs The Tahsildar
2021 Latest Caselaw 18100 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 12TH BHADRA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 17814 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

             UMMATHU MOL,
             AGED 60 YEARS
             D/O. BEERANKUNJI, AANDIKADAVATH HOUSE,
             RAYIRIMANGALAM AMSOM DESOM, TANUR P.O,
             MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 302

             BY ADVS.
             P.T.SHEEJISH
             P.K.PURUSH
             HARIKIRAN
             P.SREELAKSHMI
             A.ABDUL RAHMAN (A-1917)
             JASHITHA VIJAYAN
             AKHILA SRIDHARAN
             STEPHY GRACE RAJ



RESPONDENTS:

      1      THE THAHSILDAR,
             TALUK OFFICE, CIVIL STATION TIRUR, P.O. TIRUR,
             MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-676 101

      2      THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
             TANUR VILLAGE, P.O. TANUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
             KERALA, PIN-676 302


OTHER PRESENT:

             SRI ASHWIN SETHUMADHAVAN- SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER




       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON    03.09.2021,   THE   COURT    ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 17814 OF 2021        2

                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

alleging that, in spite of her having approached

the 1st respondent with Ext.P5 representation, he

has not been allowed to remit the tax on the

property covered by Ext.P1. He, therefore, prays

that Ext.P5 be directed to be taken up and

disposed of by the 1st respondent within a time

frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. In response, the learned Senior Government

Pleader - Sri.Ashwin Sethumadhavan, submitted

that, as is evident from the averments in the writ

petition itself, the land tax with respect to the

property in question was last paid only up to the

year 2008. He submitted that, therefore, the 1st

respondent may be given liberty to enquire into

why the further land tax has not been paid and

then take a decision on Ext.P5 appropriately.

Taking note of the afore submissions, I allow

this writ petition and direct the 1st respondent to

take up Ext.P5 representation of the petitioner

and dispose it of, after affording her and any

other person who may be interested, an opportunity

of being heard; thus culminating in an appropriate

order thereon, as expeditiously as is possible,

but not later than one month from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Needless to say, since I have not considered

the merits of the rival contentions, all of them

are left open; and the 1st respondent will also be

at liberty to cause necessary enquiries and

inspections to ascertain as to why tax has not

been paid after 2008.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/9.9

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17814/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DOCUMENT NO.

56/2006 OF SRO TANUR DATED 02.01.2006.

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF PURCHASE DATED 25.10.2007 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 3.12.2008 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE TALUK SURVEYOR.

Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01.04.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.