IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 12TH APRIL 2011 / 22ND CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10840 of 2011(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- AZHAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST, AMAYOOR POST, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, K.YOUSUF. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH SRI.SUMODH MADHAVAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. TAHSILDAR, OTTAPALAM TALUK, OTTAPALAM-679 101. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, PATTAMBI-679 303, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. DEVAKI AMMA, D/O.VARIYATHODIYIL LAKSHMI AMMA, PERUMBRAYOOR, EDAPPALLY HOUSE, NEITHIRIMANGALAM, OTTAPALAM TALUK, OTTAPALAM-679 101, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. SANTHOSH, S/O.KIZHAKKEPPATT VIJAYALAKSHMI AMMA, MANEESHA MANDIRAM, NEITHIRIMANGALAM, OTTAPALAM TALUK, OTTAPALAM-679 101, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. SMT. SUDHA DEVI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 10840 of 2011(D) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 03.01.2006 ISSUED BY VILLAGE OFFICER, PATTAMBI. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 17.03.2010 IN O.S.No. 162/2005 PASSED BY MUNSIFF'S COURT (ADDL.), PALAKKAD. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 23.03.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C)No. 10840 OF 2011 ......................................................................... Dated this the 12th April, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, an educational trust , is stated as aggrieved of non acceptance of the basic tax in respect of the property owned by the petitioner where the school is situated. The case of the petitioner is as follows: 2. There was some boundary dispute. O.S.No.162 of 2006 was filed by the respondents 3 and 4 before the Munsiff's Court, Palakkad, alleging that the petitioner had encroached into their properties and sought for permanent injunction and such other reliefs against the petitioner. Finally, the civil suit was dismissed; against which an appeal has been preferred by the said respondents, which is pending consideration before the Sub Court, Palakkad. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that no interim order has been passed by the appellate court. In the said W.P.(C)No. 10840 OF 2011 2 circumstance, respondents 3 and 4 forwarded a letter to the second respondent not to accept the basic tax in respect of the property owned by the petitioner, which in turn has been simply honoured, without any regard to the legal provisions and title of the petitioner; who seeks for immediate intervention of this Court. Despite completion of service of notice by special messenger, the respondents 3 and 4 have not chosen to appear before this Court . 4. That apart, the dispute, if at all any, as projected in the writ petition is with regard to the boundary and the title stands conferred on the basis of the conveyance effected under the relevant provisions of the Transfer of Property Act. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the tax was actually being accepted by the second respondent from the year 1999-2000 to 2006 and this fact is discernible from Ext. P1 tax receipt. It was only on the basis of the letter sent by the respondents 3 and 4, that the second respondent chose not to accept the tax thereafter, which made the petitioner to approach this Court. 5. After hearing, this Court finds that the petitioner is W.P.(C)No. 10840 OF 2011 3 entitled to succeed. Accordingly, the second respondent is directed to consider the application preferred by the petitioner and take all necessary steps to accept the basic tax in respect of the property in question, including the arrears, if any. This shall be done forthwith. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk