IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2008 / 14TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 32026 of 2005(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JOSE POLE, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.AUSEPH POLE, PAYYAMPALLY, NEAR GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL AND DHARMASASTHRA KSHETHRAM KUTTIKKADA MAYYANAD, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TAHASILDAR, (THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY), KOLLAM. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 4. THE TAHASILDAR (RR), KOLLAM. 5. THE SECRETARY, MAYYANAD GRAMAPANCHAYAT, MAYYANAD. 6. VILLAGE OFFICER, MAYYANADU VILLAGE, MAYYANADU. BY G.P. SRI. K.P. PRADEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 25.11.96 EXT.P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 17.10.2002 EXT.P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.10.2002 EXT.P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 17.10.2002 EXT.P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 11.11.2002 EXT.P6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 29.6.2004 EXT.P7 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 27.7.2004 EXT.P8 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 27.7.2004 EXT.P9 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 18.3.2005 EXT.P10 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION IN CS NO. 284/2005 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM. RESPONDENTS' ESXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 32026 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging assessment and demand of building tax in respect of a building complex comprising of residential and non- residential portion. It is seen that the Tahsildar has bifurcated the building for residential and non-residential purpose and assessed it accordingly. Petitioner cannot have any grievance against assessment made on proportionate basis depending upon the nature of use of the building. However, petitioner has raised serious objection with regard to rate of tax applied because according to the petitioner the completion of construction of the building was over prior to the revised rate came into force in July, 1996. Counsel for the petitioner relied on Ext.P1 issued by the Village Officer on 25.11.1996 posting the case for enquiry. According to the petitioner, this alone is sufficient proof of completion of construction of the building before 1996. However, Government Pleader pointed out that revised rate came on 1.7.1996 and the notice, evenif it is correct, was dated only 25.11.1996. In any case since petitioner did not file return enquiry was called for with regard to date of completion of construction of the 2 building for the purpose of assessment. Orders of assessment are also issued in the prescribed form without proper findings. In the circumstances, W.P. is disposed of directing the petitioner to furnish details towards proof of date of completion of construction of the building, such as electricity bills paid for temporary connection taken for construction purpose and thereafter bills paid for regular connection given for both residential portion as well as Ayurvedic clinic. If building construction was completed in the course of time in stages, then assessment should be made under Section 5(3) or 5(4) as the case may be. Tahsildar is directed to rectify the assessment to the extent required based on evidence produced by the petitioner. If the petitioner's claim is unacceptable, a detailed order should be issued giving reasons for rejecting petitioner's claim. Petitioner will pay 50% of the demand and along with it furnish details on or before 25.3.2008 for the Tahsildar to make revised assessment as stated above. If payment is not make and details are not furnished, recovery can be continued under the present order. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge