Thomas Joseph vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 32301 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 32301 Ker
Judgement Date : 8 November, 2024

Kerala High Court

Thomas Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 8 November, 2024

                                  1
WP(C) NO. 25850 OF 2018                            2024:KER:89457

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON

   FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1946

                       WP(C) NO. 25850 OF 2018
PETITIONER:

          THOMAS JOSEPH
          AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. V.C JOSEPH, AGED 66 YEARS,
          NAZRETH HOUSE, VAGAMON P.O., TEEKOY VILLAGE,
          MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

          BY ADVS.
          SRI.NIRMAL V NAIR
          SRI.MANU TOM THOMAS


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE
          DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

    2     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
          CIVIL STATION, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

    3     THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
          PALA, KOTTAYAM - 686 575.

    4     THE TAHSILDAR
          MEENACHIL TALUK, PALA, KOTTAYAM - 686 575.

    5     THE VILLAGE OFFICER
          TEEKOY VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM - 686 580.


          BY SRI.ARJUN AJAY SHANKAR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
08.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                   2
WP(C) NO. 25850 OF 2018                             2024:KER:89457


                           JUDGMENT

Petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition

challenging Ext.P6 assessment under the provisions of the

Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 (for short 'the Act'), with

reference to a residential building.

2. Heard Sri.Nirmal V. Nair, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri.Arjun Ajay Shankar, learned Government

Pleader for the respondents.

3. The dispute in this writ petition is only as regards

the inclusion of the veranda portion as well as the firewood

storage yard. It is contended by the learned Government

Pleader that as regards the veranda the issue is already

decided against the assessee by virtue of the judgment of this

Court in Rajappan K.I. v. Revenue Divisional Officer,

Kottayam and Others [2018 (1) KHC 432]. However, the

learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the afore

judgment is only as regards a 'chavady' and not with

reference to a 'veranda'. But the issue has not been addressed

WP(C) NO. 25850 OF 2018 2024:KER:89457

by the assessment authority with reference to the law laid

down by this Court in the afore judgment.

4. The second portion of dispute is as regards the

firewood storage yard. If the said firewood storage yard is

separate and is only used for the purpose of storing of

firewood, going by the provisions the Act, the petitioner may

be entitled for exemption.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out

that an inspection has to be carried out with respect to the

afore aspect and in such circumstances, a revisit may be

required for assessing the liability. The learned counsel for

the petitioner also points out that the judgment relied on by

the learned Government Pleader may not be apposite in so

far as the 'veranda' is not properly covered and it is only when

the 'veranda' is fully covered and can be used by the

inhabitants, the question of imposing tax arises. He would

also rely on the judgments of this Court in Padmanabhan K.

v. State of Kerala and Others [2009 (1) KHC 251] and

WP(C) NO. 25850 OF 2018 2024:KER:89457

in John Mathew v. Tahsildar, Adoor and Others [2018

(1) KHC 948].

In such circumstances, this writ petition would stand

disposed of, as under:

(i) The orders at Exts.P2, P4, P5, P6, P7, P10, P12

and P14 would stand set aside.

(ii) The 3rd respondent herein to pass fresh orders,

after carrying out the inspection of the property

in question and after hearing the petitioner,

within a period of two months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

HARISANKAR V. MENON JUDGE Skk//28.11.2024

WP(C) NO. 25850 OF 2018 2024:KER:89457

APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO.25850 OF 2018

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 1988-89.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT OF PLINTH AREA MADE BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 22-2- 2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B8-8492/13 DATED 7-9-2013 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT (WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION).

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT OF BUILDING TAX DATED 7-9-2013 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT OF LUXURY TAX DATED 7-9-2013 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND OF BUILDING TAX DATED 7-9-2013.

EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION TO CONDONE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL.

EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFIED PLAN OF THE PETITIONER'S BUILDING.

EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 2-12-2013 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT (WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION).

EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D/4237/2013/K.DIS DATED 20-1-2015 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT (WITH ENGLISH

WP(C) NO. 25850 OF 2018 2024:KER:89457

TRANSLATION).