Disposed

Kerala State Nirmithi Kendra v. Deputy Tahsildar

Kerala HC14 Nov 2014WP(C)/26743/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala reviewed a writ petition challenging demand notices. After confirming the petitioner satisfied the interim condition, the court directed the municipality to receive a representation from the petitioner to clarify disputed facts regarding liability, to be determined within two months.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is at liberty to file a representation; proceedings pursuant to demand notices are kept in abeyance.

Kerala State Nirmithi Kendra Vs Deputy Tahsildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/23RD KARTHIKA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 26743 of 2014 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

KERALA STATE NIRMITHI KENDRA ARATTUTHARA P.O., MANATHAVADI REP. BY THE CHIEF TECHNICAL OFFICER.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.SAJI VARGHESE

¶9

SMT.MARIAM MATHAI

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (REVENUE RECOVERY), TALUK OFFICE, MANANTHAVADI WYNAD DISTRICT, PIN: 670 645.

¶12

2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PAYAMPILLY VILLAGE, MANANTHAVADI TALUK, WYNAD DISTRICT PIN: 670 645.

¶13

3. THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY, THALASSERY, PIN: 670 101, REP. BY THE SECRETARY.

¶14

R3 BY ADV. SRI.I.V.PRAMOD R1 & 2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SHYSON P.MANGUZHA

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

WP(C).No. 26743 of 2014 (P)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

P1: DEMAND NOTICES NO.D2-9565/2014 DATED 14/8/14 UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT.

¶21

P2: DEMAND NOTICES NO.D2-9565/2014 DATED 14/8/14 UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT.

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL.

/ TRUE COPY /

P.S. TO JUDGE

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶28

W.P.(C)No.26743 OF 2014

¶29

Dated this the 14^th November, 2014

¶30

J U D G M E N T

¶31

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following

¶32

prayers:

¶33

“i) Call for the records leading to Exhibit P1 and P2 and set aside Exhibit P1 and Exhibit P2 by issue of a writ of certiorari, or any appropriate writ, order or direction;

¶34

ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the third respondent to issue a statement to the petitioner showing the details of the alleged amount due;

¶35

iii) Direct the respondents not to proceed in respect of disputed amounts and amounts which are not due;

¶36

iv) issue such other writ, order or direction which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶37

When the matter came up for consideration on

¶38

15.10.2014, the following interim order was passed.

¶39

“Admit. Urgent notice.

¶40

Further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1

¶41

and P2 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of one month on condition that the petitioner satisfies 1/3^rd of the disputed liability, within

¶42

¶43

W.P.(C)No.26743 OF 2014

¶44

ten days.”

¶45

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the condition imposed by this Court has been satisfied.

¶46

Heard the learned Counsel for the third

¶47

respondent/Municipality as well, who points out that there is a disputed question of fact with regard to the extent of liability, to be cleared and the amount already satisfied. The learned Counsel

¶48

points out that, if the petitioner submits a representation pointing out the facts and figures, the same will be considered and finalised, after hearing the petitioner. The proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 will be kept in abeyance till such time, submits the learned Counsel.

¶49

In the said circumstance, the petitioner is set at liberty to approach the third respondent/Municipality by filing an exhaustive representation with regard to the grievance if any, which shall be done at the earliest, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment . On such an event, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, which shall be done within two months

¶50

W.P.(C)No.26743 OF 2014

¶51

¶52

from the date of receipt of the representation. Further proceedings pursuant to Exts. P1 and P2 shall be kept in abeyance . The liability of the petitioner, if at all any will depend upon the order to be passed by the third respondent in the above representation.

¶53

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶54

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶55

Kerala State Nirmithi Kendra v. Deputy Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kerala State Nirmithi Kendra v. Deputy Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zakkeer Hussain Vs Federal Bank Ltd.

Nabeel Ansari Vs Superintendent of Customs

Madeesh M.P. Vs the Federal Bank

Tessy Tomy Vs the Federal Bank Ltd.

E.K.Vijayan Vs Federal Bank Ltd.

M/S.Maxwell Exim (P) Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)