IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2011 / 20TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 33543 of 2010(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- UNITED BUILDERS, REP.BY MANAGING PARTNER, PETER JOSEPH, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH THADIKULANGARA HOUSE, IRINGOL PO, PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS. SRI. E.S.M. KABEER SRI.M.A.FIROSH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHUNADU PERUMBAVOOR 683 542. 2. TEN'S GROUP, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER SAKKEER K.S, S/O.LATE SAINUDHEEN, AGED 40 YEARS, KOCHUKANJOOR HOUSE, VADAYAR VILLAGE, THALAYOLAPARAMBU P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 605. 3. TEN'S GROUP, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER, NISHAMON C.S, S/O.SULAIMAN C.P., NISHA MANZIL, THALAYOLAPARAMBU, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 605. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, VAIKOM - 686 141. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE, PERUMBAVOOR - 683 542. R1, R4 & R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANRAN R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.ANVER BASHEER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.33543 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The petitioner is challenging the assessments completed against him under the provisions of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 and the consequential steps of recovery initiated on the basis of Ext.P4 notice issued under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968. Contention of the petitioner is that the building in question was sold to respondents 2 and 3 by virtue of Ext.P1 Deed and those respondents are in ownership and possession of the building. It is the further case of the petitioner that by virtue of Ext.P2 the respondents 2 & 3 had undertaken the liability to pay arrears if any due and hence they are liable for payment of the amounts due. It is the complaint of the petitioner that the respondents 1, 4 and 5 are taking steps to proceed against personal properties of the petitioner, inspite of Ext.P5 representation submitted in this regard. 2. It is noticed that the building in question was constructed by the petitioner and that the assessment was completed against him. Any subsequent assignment of the building will not absolve the petitioner from liability. Of course, it is noticed that as per Section 19 of the KBT Act the tax assessed will be a charge on the building in question. But that will not W.P.(C).33543/10 -2- absolve the personal liability of the petitioner from being proceeded against to recover the amount from his other properties, he being the person assessed with tax and defaulted payment. As far as respondents 2 and 3 are concerned, they may not be in a position to raise valid objections against proceedings if any initiated on the building in question since the authority is entitled to recover the amounts, charged on the building in question. 3. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents pointed out that the petitioner had already challenged the assessment before this court by filing O.P.No.11626/03 and this court had relegated the petitioner to the appellate authority. But the petitioner had failed to resort to any such remedy inspite of the specific directions. I also take note of the fact that inspite of an undertaking made before this court the respondents 2 & 3 are failing in making payment of the amounts due. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay off the entire liability in a phased manner within a reasonable time. Such submission is made on the basis of an undertaking that he is relinquishing all challenges against the liability quantified as per Ext.P4 along with future interest if any due. 4. Under the above circumstances I am of the view that, eventhough the writ petition deserves no merit, indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to pay off the entire amount in installments, within a reasonable time. W.P.(C).33543/10 -3- 5. Accordingly the respondents are restrained from proceeding with further coercive steps, in case the petitioner makes payment of the amounts due along with future interest, in 6 (six) equal monthly installments, falling due on or before 31.1.2011 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the installments the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps, and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb