IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2009 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 8445 of 2009(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. E.I. JOSE, EDATTUKARAN HOUSE, P.O. MALA, THRISSUR - 680 732. 2. MRS.V.R. ROSA, EDATTUKARAN HOUSE, P.O. MALA, THRISSUR - 680 732. 3. MRS. CEILINE JOSE, EDATTUKARAN HOUSE, P.O. MALA, THRISSUR - 680 732. 4. SALOMY ANTONY, CHERAPANATH HOUSE, ELINJIPRA.P.O, CHALAKUDY VIA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. MERCY DEVASSY, CHEGNIMATTOM HOUSE, CHALAKUDY - 680 307. BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.ANIL D. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SALES TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHALAKUDY - 680 307. 2. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR FAST TRACK, IRINJALAKUDA - 680 125. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR) MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, CIVIL STATION, IRINJALAKUDA - 680 125. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (TAXES), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER Mr.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 8445 OF 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT The case of the petitioner is that the impugned proceedings have been passed without giving proper notice to the petitioner, whereby much loss and prejudice have been caused to the petitioner; particularly when the petitioner lost the opportunity to produce the books of accounts before the second respondent. The limited prayer is only to give an opportunity to produce the said books of accounts and to pass appropriate orders on merits. 2. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that notice was actually issued to the petitioner and that it was duly served as well. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the establishment was sold to some other person and that it was actually being run by the said person, upon whom the notice is stated as served from the part of the respondents. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court does not find it necessary to spend more time to deal with the actual manner of service of notice. No prejudice will be caused to the respondents on giving one more opportunity to the petitioner for producing the relevant records. WPC NO.8445/2009 2 3. In the above circumstances, the impugned orders Ext.P19 to 21 are set aside. Fresh orders shall be passed on merits, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to produce the necessary books of accounts. It is also made clear that the petitioner shall appear with the books of accounts before the second respondent within one month from today. The proceedings shall be finalised as above, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months thereafter. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) dnc