IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 29TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1929 OP.No. 10135 of 2003(F) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ A.KANDANKUTTY, S/O.APPUKUTTY, KALLIANKANDATH HOUSE, ELANTHIYANKODE, PALGHAT. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.SUNIL SMT.S.CHITHRA RESPONDENTS: ------------- TAHSILDAR, (BUILDING TAX ASSESSING AUTHORITY), PALGHAT. BY G.P. SRI. K.P. PRADEEP THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 ORDER ON CMP17535 OF 2003 IN OP 10135 OF 2003 DISMISSED 29.2.2008 SD/-C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. SD/-T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 9.11.98 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF CANCELLATION AND REVISED ORDER DATED 14.12.2001 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER DATED 5.12.2002 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF 2ND REVISED ORDER DATED 21.2.2003 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- O.P. NO. 10135 OF 2003 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging Ext.P4 assessment by which petitioner's building is assessed at a plinth area of 310.50 sq. metres. It is seen that revised assessment is issued after one round of appeal before the RDO. In fact original assessment made vide Ext.P1 at a plinth area of 268.44 sq. metres was revised in rectification proceedings for the reason that the plinth area adopted was wrong in as much as it was less by 42.06 sq. metres. Petitioner disputed the plinth area assessed under revised order in one round of appeal and even after remand by the RDO the Tahsildar remeasured the building and issued fresh order retaining the revised assessment. It is against this order that the petitioner has filed this O.P. stating that remeasurement was not done properly and plinth area assessed is still excess. I feel the claim for remeasurement by a third agency can be granted to the petitioner but strictly on terms of paying cost if the petitioner's claim is found to be wrong. Petitioner can with the help of any person familiar with the subject measure the 2 building and satisfy with the correctness of the plinth area. If he finds it to be wrong, he can make an application before the Tahsildar along with a copy of this judgment for measurement by a PWD Engineer who will measure the plinth area based on the request made by the Tahsildar treating such a request as a direction from this Court. However, if the plinth area assessed under the revised order is found to be correct, and petitioner's claim is found to be wrong, then there will be direction to the Tahsildar to recover a further sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards cost from the petitioner in addition to the arrears of tax. O.P. is disposed of as above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3