IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2010 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 16210 of 2010(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S.K.K.ASSOCIATES, G.S.ROAD, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI.KURIAKOSE K.ABRAHAM. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.NIVEDITHA A.KAMATH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER III, FIRST CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) KOLLAM. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (TAXES), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 16210 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved of the condition imposed by the 2nd respondent vide Ext.P12 interim order, whereby the petitioner has been directed to satisfy 60% of disputed liability in respect of the penalty imposed by the authority for the years 2005-06 and 2008-09 stating that absolutely no reasons have been mentioned therein to sustain the extent of liability so as to avail the benefit of interim stay during the pendency of the appeal. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. It is revealed from the impugned order that the appellate authority, though was satisfied with the case projected by the petitioner, has not discussed anything as to the relative merits and demerits so as to have sustained the condition making the petitioner to satisfy 60% of the disputed liability. Going by the pleadings and materials on record, this Court finds that the condition imposed by the appellate authority is much on the higher side. This Court also finds that the matter could be disposed of by giving appropriate directions to consider and finalise the appeals. 4. In the above facts and circumstances, the 2nd respondent shall consider and finalise Exts.P3 and P4 appeals after hearing the 2 WP(C) No. 16210/2010 petitioner in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The coercive steps stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till such time, on condition that the petitioner satisfied 1/3rd of the disputed liability and furnishes security for the balance amount within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc