IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2008 / 18TH POUSHA 1929 OP.No. 5019 of 2002(V) ---------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SMT.C.M.AVVABI,WIFE OF LATE C.M.ABDUL KHADER,RESIDING AT MUNIYAMKODE, CHITTARI, CHITTARI VILLAGE,HOSDURG TALUK,KASARAGOD DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH NAMBIAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR,HOSDURG. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KASARAGOD 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KASARAGOD. BY SHRI.K.P.PRADEEP, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.NO. 5019/2002 ORDER ON CMP NO. 8919/2002 IN O.P.NO. 5019/2002 DISMISSED. 08/01/2008 SD/- (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF RE-ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28/03/2001. P2 : COPY OF APPEAL DATED 16/05/2001. P3 : COPY OF RECEIPT FOR PAYMENT OF 1ST INSTALLMENT AMOUNT. P4 : COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER DATED 10/08/2001. P5 : COPY OF REVISION PETITION DATED 22/09/2001. P6 : COPY OF RECEIPT FOR PAYMENT OF 2ND INSTALLMENT AMOUNT. P7 : COPY OF REVISION ORDER OF 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 05/01/2002. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ----------------------------------- O.P. No. 5019 of 2002 ------------------------- Dated, this the 8th day of January, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is challenging the revised building tax assessment issued in respect of a commercial building constructed by petitioner’s late husband. According to petitioner construction of the building was completed before the appointed day, i.e. 10/02/1992, and therefore assessment should be at the rate in force prior to the revision of tax w.e.f. 29/07/1996. Besides this, petitioner’s case is that the original plinth area of 1165 sq.m. remains as such because she has not made any additional construction. However, learned Government Pleader submitted that the Village Officer made measurement in the year 2001 and found that petitioner has made additional construction increasing the plinth area to 1273.92 sq.m. The appeal and revision filed by the petitioner were unsuccessful and hence this original petition is filed challenging all the orders. 2. I heard learned counsel appearing for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for respondents. 3. In the first place, the rate of tax to be applied has to be the rate prevailing on the date of completion of construction of O.P.NO. 5019/2002 -2- building. In other words, the application of revised rate of building tax is not permissible merely because assessment was taken up after the revision of tax came into force. This contention of the petitioner is, therefore, accepted. However, if full construction of the building was in stages, then the assessment of total plinth area at the rate in force as on the date of completion of construction is permissible under Section 5(4) of the Act. On the other hand, if the construction of the original building was over prior to the appointed day, then the assessment of additional plinth area has to be made separately and it has to be done as provided under Section 5(3) of the Act. Since Tahsildar did not consider all these factors and has apparently committed a mistake in recording rate of tax, I dispose of this original petition with direction to the 1st respondent, Tahsildar, to make fresh assessment after hearing petitioner, after verifying the records and documents available and based on the above observations. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.) jg