IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2008 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1930 OP.No. 33852 of 2002(E) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MATHAI, S/O.KURIAKOSE, AGED 65 ALAKKARA HOUSE, KOTTAPPADY KARA, KOTTAPPADY VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE KIZHAKKAMBALAM RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD. 2. TAHSILDAR, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. TEKCHAND THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 5662 DATED 22.12.84 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF HIS SON. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.6321 DATED 23.12.97 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. F3-15183/97 DATED 17.6.98 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. F3-66/2001 DATED 2.1.2002 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. 43 DATED 4.2.2002 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER O. K.DIS. 1248/02/A7/DATED 15.7.2002 PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. 32 DATED 16.8.2002 EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. K.DIS. 35708/02/B10 DATED 17.10.2002 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- O.P. NO. 33852 OF 2002 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging assessment and demand of building tax in respect of a building on the ground that part of the building is constructed by his daughter along with son-in-law and his son. However, the case of the Tahsildar, as is clear from the order, is that transfer of building was effected by the petitioner after completion of construction. Appeal and Revision filed against assessment having failed, petitioner has approached this Court challenging the assessment. It is seen that building originally constructed and in respect of which building tax was paid, was later expanded. The plinth area originally assessed was 107.1 sq.metres whereas the plinth area presently assessed is 659.66 sq.metres. When plinth area of the building is subsequently increased, then under Section 5(4) of the Act building has to be assessed afresh to building tax and demand should be restricted to differential tax that is after giving credit for the tax paid for the portion of the building already constructed. The demand is seen made strictly 2 in accordance with Section 5(4) of the Act. 2. The next issue pertains to petitioner's dispute that portion of the building is owned by son and son-in-law. I do not think this contention has any relevance. Separate assessment under Explanation 2 to Section 2(e) arises only if the building consists of different apartments. Petitioner has no case that building comprises of different apartments entitling for separate assessments on the basis of sharing of cost and construction of the building by joint owners. A sketch produced by the petitioner, Ext.P9 also shows that building comprises of shop rooms and since building does not comprise of separate apartments, it has to be assessed as a single unit after construction is completed. Even if the building is owned by petitioner, his son and son-in-law, each portion owned by each of them, still tax has to be assessed in the joint names of all of them treating the building as one and it is a matter of sharing building tax in proportion to the ownership of the building by them. Therefore the dispute, if any, among the petitioner, his son and son-in-law in regard to building tax has to be settled among them. Further, since building tax is a charge on the 3 building under Section 19(2) of the Act, respondents can recover the tax by attachment and sale of building, if tax is not paid. W.P. is disposed of as above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 4