IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2008 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1929 W.A.No. 513 of 2008 ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.6106/2008 DATED 21/02/2008 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- M.B.ANIL, MANAGING PARTNER, MUTHODAM ASSOCIATES, BEACH ROAD, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM. 2. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, 1ST CIRCLE, KOLLAM. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.MUHAMMED RAFIQ THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.513 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 3rd day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. Aggrieved by Ext.P5 revenue recovery notice issued by the third respondent to recover the amounts due under Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner was before this Court in W.P.(C) No.6106 of 2008. 2. Admittedly, the petitioner has filed an appeal against Ext.P1 assessment order. Since there is delay in filing the appeal, the petitioner has also filed an application for condonation of delay. There is no interim order passed by the first appellate authority granting any interim order staying the order of assessment passed by the assessing authority. Further, the petitioner has not even filed an application for grant of an interim order before the first appellate authority. Since the order of assessment is alive, it is expected of the assessing authority to execute that order and recover the amounts due from the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the learned Single Judge is justified in rejecting the petitioner's request for grant of an interim order staying the recovery proceedings. W.A.No.513 of 2008 2 3. We do not see any error whatsoever in the orders passed by the learned Single Judge which would call for our interference in this appeal. Therefore, the writ appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE vns