IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2009 / 17TH ASHADHA 1931 OP.No. 27484 of 1999(V) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C. SASIDHARAN NAIR, SREE BHAVAN, RISHIMANGALAM, VANCHIYOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.N.ACHUTHA KURUP, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. TAHSILDAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL. 4. K.V. KUMAR, NAGARUVILA VEEDU, MARAKKADA ROAD, CHALA, HOTEL HILTON, SUBVRAMONYA SWAMY KOVIL ROAD, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL. 5. VEEN K NAIR, WIFE OF K.V. KUMAR, DO.DO. ADDL. R4 AND R5 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER ON IA 97/2006 DATED 8.7.2009 R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MOHAMMED RAFIQ SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN FOR ADDL.R4 & 5 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 ORDER ON CMP 46541 OF 1999 IN OP 27484 OF 1999 DISMISSED 8.7.2009 SD/-C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 26.3.1984 ISSUED BY ASSESSING AUTHORITY, TAHSILDAR, TRIVANDRUM TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.2.1986 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF TAHSILDAR, TRIVANDRUM NO.C5-18939/82 DATED 19.1.1987 AND ORDER OF ASSESSMENT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE KBT ACT OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.2.1987 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT NO. D.DIS. 6244/89/B (PT.13/89) DATED 2.6.1989 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF REVISION PETITION DATED 18.7.1989 OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT NO. D.DIS. 75518/89/C4 DATED 21.9.1994 EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP 15650 OF 1994 K DATED 4.2.1999 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. R6.5500/84 DATED 6.2.86 OF THE REVENUE OFFICER, TRIVANDRUM CORPORATION WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF FIRST RESPONDENT NO. D.DIS. 14075/99/04 DATED 18.9.1999 EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. G6-65934/99 DATED 6.1.2000 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P12 OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO EXT.P11 DATED 22.3.2000 EXT.P13 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. D.DIS. 65934/99 DATED 31.3.2003 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- O.P. NO. 27484 OF 1999 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging Ext.P3 order which is a revised building tax assessment issued by the Tahsildar, confirmed in appeal and revision, on the ground that proceedings rectifying the assessment is illegal and unauthorised. It is seen from Ext.P3 that building tax assessment originally made was revised because annual value taken was at variance with annual value fixed by the local authority for the purpose of building tax assessment under the Municipal Corporations Act. It is seen that tax originally assessed was Rs. 23,629.60 which was revised to Rs. 1,58,550/- for the reason that original assessment was not based on annual value determined by the Corporation. Original assessment is issued vide Ext.P1 which does not contain even the basis for assessment. It is not known as to what was the basis for making the original assessment and if it was based on what annual value, what was the annual value fixed and the basis for it. "Annual value" as defined under Section 2(a) of the Building Tax Act has the same meaning given to it under the Municipal Corporations Act. If 2 assessment is originally completed without fixing the annual value in accordance with statutory provision, then there is a mistake in the original assessment which calls for rectification. Since building is subject to property tax assessment by the Corporation, Tahsildar rightly adopted annual value fixed by the Corporation, which was not originally furnished by the petitioner. Therefore the petitioner's contention that original assessment cannot be rectified based on annual value fixed by the Corporation is only to be rejected. However, I notice from the order of the Tahsildr that annual value adopted by the Tahsildar is reduced by the Corporation from Rs. 1,84,800/- to Rs. 1,10,000/- plus Rs. 900/-. Therefore Ext.P3 assessment confirmed in appeal and revision requires to be modified based on the revised property tax assessment completed by the Corporation vide Exts. P9 and P10. O.P. is accordingly allowed in part directing the Tahsildar to revise the building tax assessment by recomputing capital value based on annual value refixed by the Corporation at Rs. 1,10,000/- plus Rs. 900/-. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3