IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 22ND MAGHA 1929 Con.Case(C).No. 1646 of 2007(S) ---------------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.34453/2006 Dated 08/02/2007 .................... PETITIONER: --------------------- SUNDARAN KARUVAMKANDIYIL, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, KARUVANCHERY AMSOM DESOM, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.ANTONY RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. SRI.PUSHPARAJAN, S/O.NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGE NOT KNOWN, TAHSILDAR, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. SRI.AJAYAKUMAR, S/O.NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGE NOT KNOWN, VILLAGE OFFICER, PALAYAD VILLAGE, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Contempt Case (C).No. 1646 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11th day of February, 2008. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = J U D G M E N T Alleging that the petitioner has made an application for receiving basic tax from him for a property, he filed the writ petition on which A1 judgment was passed. That judgment does not enable the petitioner to conclude issues as to his entitlement to pay tax. The direction was only that the competent authority will pass orders, on his request to receive tax from him. 2. An affidavit has been filed by the respondent s that in respect of the request, the petitioner has not produced the relevant documents. 3. The petitioner's case is that he purchased the property and he is a transferee entitled to pay tax. It goes without saying that he has to apply for mutation in his name, by making necessary applications under the Transfer of Property Rules and only on the strength of that, could he claim to pay basic tax in his own name. Under such circumstances, I find no ground to entertain this case under the Contempt of Courts Act. In the result this case is dismissed. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN JUDGE bkn/-