IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2008 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 30706 of 2006(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. REJI AUGUSTINE, S/O. AUGUSTHY, OMPILLIL HOUSE, MUTTOM, THUDANGANADU P.O., THODUPUZHA. 2. ANEY GEORGE, D/O. GEORGE, KUZHINJALIL HOUSE, MUTTOM, THUDANGANADU P.O., THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.C.M.TOMY SRI.MATHEW SKARIA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR (BUILDING TAX ASSESSING AUTHORITY), TALUK OFFICE, THODUPUZHA. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DISTRICT COLLECTORATE, PAINAVU, IDUKKI. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. BY G.P. SRI.TEKCHAND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: PHOTOCOPY OF SALE DEED NO.42/2000 DT.10.1.00 OF ARAKKULAM SRO. P2: .DO. 41/2000 .DO. P3: PHOTOCOPY OF AGREEMENT NO.12/2002 DT.18.5.02 OF ARAKKULAM SRO. P4: PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DT.16.6.2004 OF R1. P5: PHOTOCOPY OF APPEAL DT.6.8.2004 FILED BY PETITIONERS BEFORE R2. P6: PHOTOCOPY OF PROCEEDINGS DT.30.8.2005 OF R2. P7: PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT FOR PAYMENT OF PROPERTY TAX OF THE BUILDING OF 1ST PETITIONER. P8: .DO. 2ND PETITIONER. P9: PHOTOCOPY OF ASSESSMENT NOTICE DT.11.8.2006 OF THE ASSESSMENT OFFICER ISSUED TO 1ST PETITIONER. P10: .DO. 2ND PETITIONER. P11: PHOTOCOPY OF REVISION PETITION DT.7.12.2005 FILED BY PETITIONERS BEFORE R3. P12: PHOTOCOPY OF PROCEEDINGS DT.31.7.2006 OF R3. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.30706 of 2006 .................................................................... Dated this the 21st day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT Prayer in the W.P. is for separate assessment of the building owned by the petitioners together, but in portions. It is conceded that the commercial building is constructed with common corridor and facilities common to both buildings without which buildings cannot be used. Separate assessment is contemplated only for buildings consisting of separate apartments. In this case there is no separation of buildings, even though pieces of land on which building is constructed are separately owned by petitioners. Therefore, I do not think any separate assessment is permissible for each portion of the building. Explanation 2 to Section2(e) of the Kerala Building Tax Act, therefore, is not applicable. However, petitioners have to share the building tax liability in proportion to the area occupied by each of them. The W.P.(C) is disposed of as above. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms