IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 31956 of 2006(D) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ K.AHAMMED, S/O.LATE ALAVIKUTTY, VALIYACHALIYIL HOUSE, CHELARI, VELIMUKKU (PO), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.RAMADAS RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (ARREAR COLLECTION) TALUK OFFICE, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GEORGE MATHEW VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).31956/2006-D APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT FOR THE PERIOD 2002-2003 & 2003-04, DATED 15/12/2003. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE -DO- -DO- 2004-05, DATED 10/01/05. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE -DO- -DO- 2005-06, DATED 07/02/2006. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE -DO- -DO- 2006-07, DATED 15/09/2006. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE DATED 02/07/2004 ISSUED BY THE THENHIPALAM GRAMA PACNCHAYATH. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE APPROVED PLAN BY THE PANCHAYATH. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 26/11/2005 FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31/03/2006 FROM THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE DATED 25/10/2006 FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL // TRUE COPY // Rs/ T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)NO.31956 of 2006-D - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of July, 2008. JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the imposition of luxury tax as per Exts.P7 to P9, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. The building in question was constructed in a plot of land having 6.70 ares of land in Thenhipalam amsom, Tirurangadi Taluk. The petitioner constructed six separate residential apartments in a single row on the ground floor. Exts.P1 to P4 are the receipts showing the payments of property tax separately for these buildings. Ext.P5 is the ownership certificate. These buildings are let out to different tenants also. Ext.P6 is the plan which shows that these are separate residential apartments. But still, for the assessment of luxury tax, it is taken as a single unit. The petitioner, even though objected to the same, that was not considered by the appellate authority. Ultimately, he approached the Land Revenue Commissioner who by Ext.P8, directed him to file an appeal. But thereafter, Ext.P9 revenue recovery notice was issued which compelled the petitioner to file this writ petition. 2. By an interim order dated 1.12.2006 this court directed that the petitioner may pay the tax demanded under protest. Now that the petitioner WPC 31956/2006 -2- has effected the payments already, I find that the petitioner can be relegated the remedy of appeal before the Appellate Authority against the imposition of luxury tax. 3. Therefore, if the petitioner files an appeal before the second respondent within 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and final orders shall be passed after hearing the petitioner, expeditiously. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/