IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 26158 of 2009(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.M.ASHRAF, KALPAKA CHICKEN AGENCIES, PTHANATHANI, P.O.PUNNATHALA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SMT.K.HYMAVATHY SRI.T.G.ABHILASH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (KVAT), COMMERCIAL TAXES, MALAPPURAM. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) I, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J ---------------------- W.P.(c) No. 26158 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P8 interim order of the 3rd respondent tribunal. Pending consideration of the appeals by the tribunal, when revenue recovery steps was initiated, the petitioner had approached this court on an earlier occasion. This Court directed the 3rd respondent Tribunal to consider and dispose of stay applications and further directed to keep in abeyance the recovery proceedings till disposal of the stay petitions. Contentions against Ext.P8 is that it is issued without proper application of mind and without adverting to the grounds raised in the appeals on its merits. 2. On going by Ext.P8 interim order, it is noticed that the 3rd respondent Tribunal found that, the issue involved in the appeals stand already decided by this court against the petitioner. The contention raised before the Tribunal is only to the effect that the decision of this court on the issue is pending in challenge before the Honourable Supreme Court. After W.P.(c) No.26158/09 2 considering those aspects, the Tribunal granted interim stay imposing condition for remitting a further sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and on furnishing security for the balance amount. 3. In my considered opinion the order of the tribunal impugned herein can neither be categorized as a non-speaking order or as an order issued without application of mind, nor it can be said that the order is one issued without advertence to the contentions raised in the appeals. Therefore I find no infirmity or irregularity with the impugned order warranting interference by this court. The condition stipulated in the order is one coming within the discretion of the appellate authority, with respect to which interference is not proper. Hence the writ petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. 4. However, I am inclined to extent the time for compliance of the conditions stipulated in Ext.P8 order. If the petitioner complies the conditions stipulated by the impugned order within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be accepted as proper compliance of the stipulations. (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) jsr