IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 28TH JUNE 2010 / 7TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16006 of 2010(A) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. P.M.MOHAMMED NIZAR, S/O.LATE MUHAMMD IBRAHIM,PADIYATHU MANAPATTU, S.N.PURAM,KODUNGALOOR,THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. P.M.MOHIYUDHEEN,S/O.LATE MUHAMMED IBRAHIM, PADIYATHU MANAPATTU,S.N.PURAM, KODUNGALLOOR,THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. P.M.SAJNA,D/O.LATE MUHAMMED IBRAHIM, PADIYATHU MANAPATTU,S.N.PURAM,KODUNGALLOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.JALEEL RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR. 3. THE TAHSILDAR,KODUNGALLOOR TALUK. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,LOKAMALESWARAM VILLAGE,KODUNGALLOOR TALUK. R1 TO R4 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.16006/2010 A APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF SALE DEED NO.142 OF 1982 DTD. 18/01/1982 OF THE SUB REGISTRY, KODUNGALLOOR. P2: COPY OF PARTITION DEED NO.1248/2001 DTD. 24/04/2001 OF THE SUB REGISTRY, KODUNGALLOOR. P3: COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DTD. 29/09/2007 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF RECEIPT DTD. 26/10/2007 FOR PAYMENT OF 1ST INSTALMENT OF BUILDING TAX, ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICE, LOKAMALESWARAM. P4(A): COPY OF RECEIPT DTD.18/03/2009 FOR PAYMENT OF 2ND INSTALMENT OF BUILDING TAX, ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICE, LOKAMALESWARAM. P5: COPY OF ORDER NO.K.DI.S.16431/07/C1/K.DIS. DTD. 31/01/2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P6: COPY OF REVISION PETITION DTD. 16/03/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P7: COPY OF ORDER NO.G8-22070/09 DTD. 9/12/2009 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.16006 of 2010-A ---------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are challenging the steps taken by the respondents for fixing the liability under the Kerala Building Tax Act without any regard to the actual facts and figures; particularly as to the satisfaction of the liability in respect of the existing area, which was already assessed and the issue is more related to the construction effected by the adjacent owner which is a separate building. 2. Challenging Ext.P3 assessment order passed by the third respondent, treating the above buildings together, the petitioners approached the second respondent/appellate authority, which however did not turn to be fruitful, as borne by Ext.P5. Eventhough the petitioners preferred statutory revision before the first respondent, as borne by Ext.P6, the same also did not turn to be successful and the revision was dismissed, as borne by Ext.P7 order. The petitioners are now before this Court, challenging the impugned orders passed by the concerned respondents, raising many a W.P(C) No.16006 of 2010-A 2 ground, legal as well as factual. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. The basic aspect projected in the Writ Petition is that, the petitioners did not get sufficient or effective opportunity to substantiate the position with reference to the relevant documents. Eventhough, the position was sought to be highlighted before the appellate authority as well as the revisional authority, the grievance was not properly considered, leading to dismissal of the appeal/ revision petition, as borne by Exts.P5 and P7 orders. 5. The learned Government Pleader, with reference to Ground (E) of Ext.P6 memorandum of revision submits that the petitioners have admitted the liability in respect of the undisputed plinth area 796.98M2 to the extent of Rs.1,34,456/-, however questioning the demand made for a sum of Rs.1,90,800/-. The petitioners have already satisfied 50% of the disputed liability in the course of filing the statutory appeal as well as the revision. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances narrated in the Writ Petition, this Court finds that the petitioners could be given one more opportunity to substantiate the grievance, on condition that the petitioners satisfy the admitted liability as stated in Ground (E) W.P(C) No.16006 of 2010-A 3 of Ext.P6. Accordingly, Exts.P3, P5 and P7 orders are set aside and the third respondent/assessing authority is directed to re-consider the matter, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners are at liberty to produce the relevant documents, if any. The balance/deficit amount in respect of the undisputed liability as stated in Ground 'E' of Ext.P6 revision petition shall be satisfied by the petitioners within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Subject to this, the matter shall be reconsidered and finalised by the third respondent, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the third respondent for pursuing further steps. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab