IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10114 of 2008(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ PATHUMMA, D/O.KUNHIMOYI, PUZHAKKAL HOUSE, PANTHALLOOR AMSOM, PANTHALLOOR VILLAGE, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN SMT.C.C.JANCY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PANTHALLOOR VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 10114 OF 2008 D = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4th April, 2008. J U D G M E N T The dispute in this writ petition is regarding the non- acceptance of land tax in respect of 33.5 cents in RS No. 311 in Block No. 47 in Panthalloor Village. Petitioner submits that till 2005 land tax was being accepted and Ext. P3 series are the receipts that have been issued. It is submitted that when current tax was tendered for payment that was declined to be accepted by the 2nd respondent for the reason that a suit as O.S. No. 28/05 was pending before the Munsiff's Court, Manjeri. According to the petitioner, the suit has been dismissed as early as on 17.3.2007 and under cover of Ext. P4 he has even produced a copy of the judgment. Despite this, and various representations that were made the 2nd respondent has not accepted the land tax and hence this writ petition has been filed. 2. If as stated by the petitioner the only reason for non- W.P.(C) No. 10114 OF 2008 -2- acceptance of the land tax in respect of the land mentioned above was the pendency of the suit, with the dismissal of the suit as asserted by her there should not be any further impediment in accepting the land tax. Petitioner also submits that he has produced a copy of the judgment along with Ext. P4. In view of the above, it is only appropriate that the 2nd respondent considers the matter in the light of the civil court judgment produced by her. This the 2nd respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 3. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-