IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2011 / 29TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 38180 of 2010(V) ---------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- HOTEL SINDHU BAR, KODUNGALLOOR, TRICHUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 664, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, C.B. RABEESH. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, KODUNGALLUR - 682664. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM - 682 011. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAES, IRINJALAKUDA - 680 121. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.38180 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Against Ext.P1 order of assessment finalised with respect to the year 2005-06, the petitioner had preferred Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. When recovery steps were initiated pending disposal of the appeal and the stay petition, the petitioner had approached this court and in Ext.P5 judgment the 2nd respondent was directed to pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition and the recovery steps were stayed till then. 2. Ext.P6 is the interim order of stay issued by the 2nd respondent in compliance with the directions contained in Ext.P5 judgment. In Ext.P6, stay was granted subject to condition of the petitioner remitting 1/4th of the amount due and on furnishing Security Bond for the balance, before the assessing authority within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. 3. According to the petitioner, the 1/4th amount insisted through Ext.P6 was paid within the time stipulated therein, as WP(C). 38180/10 2 evidenced from Ext.P7. It is also stated that Security Bond as per Ext.P8 was furnished before the assessing authority on 11.3.2010, which admittedly is after the date stipulated in Ext.P6 order. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the 3rd respondent has not accepted Ext.P8 Security Bond and coercive steps for recovery was initiated on issuing Garnishee Order against the Bank wherein the petitioner is holding account and having transactions. Under the above circumstances the petitioner is seeking direction for keeping in abeyance the recovery steps till the disposal of the appeal. 4. Heard, Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents. It is contended that the Security Bond as per Ext.P8 was not submitted in proper format and the same was not furnished within the time stipulated in Ext.P6 order. However, it is conceded that the petitioner has remitted 1/4th of the amount as stipulated in Ext.P6, within time. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances I am of the view that the petitioner can be permitted to furnish proper Security Bond within a short time in compliance with the condition imposed in Ext.P6. WP(C). 38180/10 3 6. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to furnish proper Security Bond as provided under the Rules, within a period of two weeks from today. If Security Bond is furnished in an acceptable manner within the time stipulated as above, the same shall be considered as proper compliance of condition stipulated in Ext.P6 and on that basis all further steps of recovery shall be kept in abeyance. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb