Disposed

M/S.Indraprastha Beach Resorts Pvt. Ltd. v. the Varkala Municipality

Kerala HC3 Feb 2015WP(C)/3401/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought vacancy remission of building tax. Court disposed of writ at admission stage, directing the third respondent to decide the pending statutory appeal within 60 days and restraining recovery proceedings until then.

What did the court decide?

Direction to third respondent to decide statutory appeal within 60 days; restraint on coercive recovery pending disposal.

M/S.Indraprastha Beach Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Varkala… — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/14TH MAGHA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 3401 of 2015 (A)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S.INDRAPRASTHA BEACH RESORTS PVT. LTD AGED 64 YEARS PAPANASAM, BEACH ROAD, VARKALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695141

¶8

REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SADASIVAN MANGALAN.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.D.KISHORE

¶10

SMT.MINI GOPINATH

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

THE VARKALA MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VARKALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-694001.

¶13

THE MUNICIPAL SECRETARY VARKALA MUNICIPALITY, VARKALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-691001.

¶14

THE STANDING COMMITTEE FOR FINANCE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, VARKALA MUNICIPALITY VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-691001.

¶15

R BY SRI.M.R.RAJESH, SC, VARKALA MUNICIPALITY

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No. 3401 of 2015 (A)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXT. P1 :	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.11.2014 IN W.P.[C] 29847 OF 2014 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
EXT. P2 :	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.R5-14803/14 DATED 6.12.2014 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT. P2A :	THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P2.
EXT. P3 :	TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 5.1.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT.
EXT. P4 :	TRUE COPY OF THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28.10.2014 FOR RS.2,90,166/-
EXT. P4A :	THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P4.
EXT. P5 :	TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28.10.2014 FOR RS.3,21,703/-
EXT. P5A :	THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P5.
EXT. P6 :	TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28.10.2014 FOR RS.7,943/-
EXT. P6A :	THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P6.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

¶27

= = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.3401 of 2015

¶28

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2015

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself.

¶31

Briefly stated, the petitioner, who has a building un occupied for some considerable time, applied to the respondent Municipality under Section 239 of the Kerala Municipality Act for vacancy remission of building tax. When the said application was not considered, he approached this Court invoking Ext.P1 judgment in W.P.(C).No.29847/2014. Later, the authorities having considered the petitioner's application passed Ext.P2 order rejecting his claim. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed Ext.P3 statutory appeal which is yet to be disposed of. Ventilating his grievances that, pending the statutory appeal, the respondent Municipality has made drastic efforts to take

¶32

W.P.(C) No.3401 of 2015

¶33

¶34

coercive steps against the petitioner for realising building tax, he has filed the present writ petition.,

¶35

In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, without adverting to the merits of the matter, this Court disposes of the present writ petition with a direction to the third respondent to consider Ext.P3 statutory appeal and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. It is further made clear that until Ext.P3 statutory appeal is disposed of, the respondent Municipality shall not take any coercive steps for recovery of the alleged building tax from the petitioner.

¶36

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE

¶37

M/S.Indraprastha Beach Resorts Pvt. Ltd. v. the Varkala Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Indraprastha Beach Resorts Pvt. Ltd. v. the Varkala Municipality

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

C.P.Kumaran Vs State of Kerala

A J John Vs the Thrissur Corporation and Another

Chandrakala Vs Corporation of Cochin

Stanslaus Xavier T.M. Vs Shri. C.v.Nandan

Gireesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Rosy George Vs State of Kerala