IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 23RD MAGHA 1929 WA.No. 2671 of 2007() ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.30212/2007 Dated 11/10/2007 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER IN WP: -------------------- DEWAN BAHADUR V.VERGHESE HOSPITAL TRUST, TIRUVALLA MEDICAL MISSION HOSPITAL, TIRUVALLA, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR, MR.SAM ABRAHAM- PARAYIL. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.) SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS IN WP: -------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, TIRUVALLA MUNICIPALITY, TIRUVALLA. 2. THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/02/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. ------------------------------- W.A.NO.2671 OF 2007 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T KOSHY,J. Appellant petitioner filed Ext.P7 revision petition before the tribunal for local self Government Institutions. Even though revision petition was filed and matter was heard, no orders were passed in the revision petition. But recovery proceedings were pursued. Petitioner approached this Court by filed W.P.(C).No.28120/2006. This Court granted interim stay on reasons, provided, petitioner deposits Rs.2,00,000/-. The learned Single Judge of this Court by Ext.P12 judgment directed that stay earlier issued on payment of Rs.2,00,000/- shall continue till order is passed and that order is still in force. Meanwhile, demand was issued stating that pre-deposit of the amount is a condition preceding in filing the revision and entire amount should be paid and that was rejected and again appellant approached this Court. Since the tribunal cannot WA.2671/07 2 dispense with payment of tax which is a condition precedent in filing the appeal, writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment. We are of the opinion that earlier in the writ petition, there was a stay of recovery of proceedings. On the facts and circumstances of the case, without making the precedent, we are of the opinion that it is a fit case where payment of tax should be dispensed with before hearing the revision petitioner as revision petition was once heard. Revision petition was filed in 27.10.2006. Stay of recovery was already granted on conditions and those conditions were fulfilled. However, some more amount have to be paid by the petitioner. In the above circumstances, Rs.2,00,000/- more should be deposited within one month from today and on deposit of the amount, revision petition shall be disposed of on merits as expeditiously as possible within two months from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment by the tribunal. Till then, no further recovery proceedings shall be taken. Since the earlier hearing w s conducted an year ago, a fresh hearing should be granted. We are not expressing any opinion on the merits of WA.2671/07 3 the matter or law contained in general conditions regarding the pre-deposit of duty. With the above observations this writ appeal is disposed of. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE K.HEMA, JUDGE prp J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T --------------------------------------------------------- 1st January, 2008