IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 23RD BHADRA 1931 WA.No. 1985 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.11571/2004 Dated 16/06/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS IN WPC: --------------------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR (ASSESSING AUTHORITY UNDER BUILDING TAX ACT), SASTHAMKOTTA. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY G.P. SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER IN WPC: --------------------------------- K.RAVINDRAN, S/O.SEKHARAN, CHERUPANAMDINAMVILA, EDAKKAD P.O., PORUVAZHY, SASTHAMKOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. .................................................................... Writ Appeal No.1985 of 2009 .................................................................... Dated this the 14th day of September, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The only dispute raised in the Writ Appeal filed by the State is as to the date of completion of construction of the building by the respondent. We have heard Government Pleader appearing for the appellant and counsel appearing for the respondent. On going through the judgment and after hearing both sides, we do not find any justification to interfere with the judgment because the learned Single Judge relying on the evidence produced, particularly the Panchayat records, came to the conclusion that the construction of the building was over in 1993-94. Further, the appellant's case that the building constructed was modified by adding another bed room in the first floor after 1.4.1999 does not stand substantiated with any evidence except the difference between the data recorded about the building in the Panchayat records and in the report of the Tahsildar. We do not think the Panchayat record can be made the sole basis for assuming the date 2 of completion of construction of the building as any day after 1.4.1999 to attract liability for luxury tax. Consequently Writ Appeal is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge V.K.MOHANAN Judge pms