IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2009 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 13133 of 2008(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- MR.T.H.ABDUL JABBAR, AGED 47, S/O.LATE T.K.M.HYDROSE, THOTTATHIL KOTTAPPURATH, MARAMPILLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DIST. BY ADV. MR. P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MOOVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DIST. 3. THASILDAR, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, KUNNATHUNADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. TAHSILDAR, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, KUNNATHUNADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. VILLAGE OFFICER, MARAMPILLY VILLAGE OFFICE, MARAMPILLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DIST. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 13133 of 2008 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 8th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging the imposition of 'luxury tax' on the building belonging to the petitioner, contending that the measurement effected by the third respondent in calculating the 'plinth area', as defined under Section 2 (k) of the Kerala Building Tax Act, is not at all correct and proper. The main prayer sought for by the petitioner is to have a re measurement of the 'plinth area' of the building, stating that the petitioner is ready and willing to meet the necessary expenses in this regard. 2. The learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that, the petitioner had actually admitted the 'plinth area' during the course of the proceedings, though in the reply affidavit filed before this Court, the petitioner has taken a 'U' turn stating the return submitted by the petitioner was a 'blank one' (in paragraph 2 of the reply affidavit). 3. Even though the submission made by the petitioner does not appear to be palatable to this Court, during the course of hearing, it was brought to the notice of this Court that, by judgment dated 14.11.2008 passed by another learned Single Judge in WP(C) 15767 of 2006, whereby 're measurement' of 'plinth area' was ordered to be WP (C) No. 13133 of 2009 : 2 : held by a qualified engineer, making it clear that on effecting such re measurement, if the petitioner the petitioner lost the case, he had to pay a cost of Rs.5,000/- and if he succeeded the amount paid by the petitioner towards luxury tax thereon, would be refunded by the authority without delay. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, petitioner is ready and willing to clear the liability for availing the benefit of the above judgment, which course is also conceded from the part of the learned Government Pleader as well. 5. In the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to satisfy the liability fixed by the third respondent towards the luxury tax forthwith. On remittance of the amount, the third respondent shall cause the 'plinth area' of building re measured with the help of a qualified engineer of the PWD, with proper notice to the petitioner, subject to the condition that petitioner shall bare cost of such re measurement. It is also made clear that if the petitioner loses his case, he will have to pay Rs.5000/- towards the cost and if he succeeds, the amount already paid by the petitioner towards luxury tax shall be refunded without any delay. The proceedings as above shall be finalized within 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd