IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2011 / 28TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 10937 of 2007(B) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. HARIDASAN MATHILAKATH, 2. KANAKAM HARIDAS, (PETITIONERS 1 & 2 ARE RESIDING NOW AT 304, PARASUDHAR, PLOT NO.5, SECTOR 25, NERUL, NAVI MUMBAI) * 3. FUJI TECHNICAL SERVICES PVT.LTD., PENTA ESTATE, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI REPRESENTED THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR, M.HARIDASAN. (DELETED FROM PARTY ARRAY AS PER JUDGMENT DATED 20/10/2011 IN THIS WRIT PETITION) BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, KOCHI-682011. 2. SIDHARTH ENTERPRISES REP. BY GENERAL MANAGER, 35/1460 C, PENTA ESTATE, JANATHA JUNCTION, PALARIVATTOM P.O, KOCHI-682 025. R1 BY SPL. GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.SOJAN JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 10937 of 2007(B) APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION OF KOCHI DATED 14.10.1998. EXT.P2(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY CORPORATION OF COCHIN DATED 13.10.1998. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RETURN SUBMITTED ON 19.07.1999. EXT.P3(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING AX RETURN SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS ON 19.08.1999. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY FIRST RESPONDENT ON 30.09.2004. EXT.P5 : PHOTOSTAT COPY OF STATEMENT FILED ON 03.11.2004. EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF ADDITIONAL STATEMENT FILED ON 21.11.2004. EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF NAMES OF OWNERS RESIDENTIAL FLATS TO SREE PARVATHY APARTMENTS. EXT.P8 : TRUE COPY OF DETAILS OF PAYMENT RECEIVED FROM THE FLAT OWNERS OF SREE PARVATHY APARTMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. EXT.P9 : TRUE COPY OF EXTRACT OF LEDGE FOR THE YEAR 1996-97. EXT.P10 : TRUE COPY OF EXTRACT OF LEDGE FOR THE YEAR 1997-98. EXT.P11 : TRUE COPY OF NEWS ITEM CAME IN HINDU DATED 16.03.2007. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON,J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 10937 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT The dispute is with regard to the fixation of liability under the Kerala Building Taxes Act; in relation to the ownership of the 'flat' in a multi unit apartment. The issue involved is whether the petitioners are entitled to have the benefit of 'Explanation II' to 'Section 2(e)' of the Kerala Building Taxes Act, to have separate assessment or whether the building is liable to be assessed as a single unit. 2. When the matter is taken up for consideration today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, no relief is pressed in respect of the third petitioner, whose grievance has already been redressed by virtue of other appropriate proceedings, particularly in view of the judgment dated 26.05.2004 in O.P. No.22906 of 1999. As such, the third petitioner is deleted from the party array, as sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Coming to the issue in respect of the petitioners 1 and 2, it is stated that, the said petitioners were the owners of WP(C) No. 10937 of 2007 -:2:- the land in question which is having an extent of about 30 cents. In furtherance to the idea to have the property developed, they entered into an agreement with the 2nd respondent on 26.05.1996 pursuant to which the property was developed by the 2nd respondent and a building was constructed therein comprising of different units. The 2nd respondent had entered into various agreements with third parties for constructing the apartments. The first petitioner was allotted two flats in lieu of his share in the land and the second petitioner purchased one. It is stated that the petitioners have already filed returns before the 1st respondent. 4. However, Ext.P4 notice was issued directing the petitioners to produce various documents; which according to the petitioners is not correct or sustainable for different reasons as stated in the writ petition. It is stated that the petitioners have already preferred detailed notes of argument; but, the proceedings are still to be finalised. The learned counsel submits that the law is crystal clear now, by virtue of the decision WP(C) No. 10937 of 2007 -:3:- rendered in Bavasons Constructions (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala [2007(3) KLT 101] and the different units have to be assessed separately. 5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that a Full Bench of this Court has declared the law in unequivocal terms as per the decision reported in District Collector v. Sreekumari Kunjamma [2011(1) KLT 248]. 6. In the above circumstance, the 1st respondent, who is the assessing authority, is directed to consider and finalise the matter, particularly with regard to the returns filed by petitioners 1 and 2 herein and pass appropriate orders fixing the liability, if any, under the relevant provisions of Kerala Building Tax Act in tune with the law declared as aforesaid, of course after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. 7. Proceedings as above shall be completed as early as possible, at any rate within 'three months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioners shall produce a WP(C) No. 10937 of 2007 -:4:- copy of the judgment along with the rulings cited supra for further steps. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE ttb