IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 19TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 28TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 24605 of 2011(A) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- BRIJISH MOHAMMED, S/O.ABOOBACKER, ARANGATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O. KUMARANELLUR, WADAKANCHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA STATE, PIN-680 590. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KUMARANELLUR GROUP VILLAGE OFFICE, KUMARANELLUR P.O., WADAKANCHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA STATE, PIN-680 590. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.N. SANTHOSH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/09/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 24605 of 2011(A) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.2873 OF 2007 DATED 13/06/2007 OF THE PROPERTY HAVING 15 CENTS OF LAND IN SY. NO.415/PT OF KUMARANELLUR VILLAGE, THALAPPALLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, REGISTERED AT WADAKANCHERY SRO. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 09/08/2011 FOR THE YEAR 2001 IN RESPECT OF EXHIBIT P-1 PROPERTY. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 07/05/2010 FOR THE YEAR 2010 IN RESPECT OF EXHIBIT P-1 PROPERTY. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs ANTONY DOMINIC, J .......................................... W.P.(C).24605/2011 .......................................... Dated this the 19th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner claims to be the owner of a property having an extent of 15 cents situated in Survey No.415/pt of Kumaranellur Village, Thalappally Taluk, Thrissur District. The complaint of the petitioner is that the respondent is refusing to accept the tax concerning the property due to an attachment by the Customs Department. It is the case of the petitioner that there is no justification for initiating proceedings against his property and hence tax is liable to be accepted. In the nature of the grievance, this Court is not required to examine the issue regarding the validity of the alleged attachment over the property. 2. As far as the complaint of non acceptance of tax is concerned, this Court has already been held that the pendency of attachment is not a justification for not accepting the tax. Therefore, it is directed that the respondent shall accept the tax concerning the property in question irrespective of the pendency of the attachment. W.P.(C).24605/2011 2 3. In so far as the request of the petitioner for possession certificate is concerned, it is clarified that it will be open to the petitioner to make an application in which event same will also be considered and orders passed without any delay. 4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs