Allowed

K.K.John v. Municipal Corporation

Kerala HC12 Feb 2015WP(C)/3709/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala quashed a notice demanding tax on a residential house (Exhibit P4) based on precedent. It directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's building permission application afresh within one month. The order relied on ratio decidendi from two prior judgments.

What did the court decide?

Quashed Exhibit P4 (tax notice). Directed the Secretary to consider the petitioner's building permission application afresh within one month.

K.K.John Vs Municipal Corporation — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/23RD MAGHA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 3709 of 2015 (K)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

K.K.JOHN, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.KAIPARAMBAN KUNJUVARU, KAIPARAMBIL (H), PERINGAVU DESOM, PERINGAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, PERINGAVU P.O., THRISSUR - 680 018.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.M.R.DHANIL SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 001.

¶11

THE SECRETARY, THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶12

THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, VILLVATTOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 637.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.K.P.VIJAYAN

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

APPENDIX IN WP(C).No. 3709 of 2015 (K)

¶16

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶17

EXT. P1-TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.440/2012 DATED 28.01.2012

¶18

EXT. P1(a)- A TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT. P1

¶19

EXT. P2- A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO. 5423164 DATED 05.1.2012 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER PERINGAVU

¶20

EXT. P2(a)- A TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P2

¶21

EXT. P3- A TRUE COPY OF THE BILL ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICTY BOARD DATED 8.11.2011

¶22

EXT. P3(a)- A TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P3

¶23

EXT. P4- A TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION BY CORPORATION BEARING NO.VLM/BA/0120/14

¶24

EXT. P5- A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 23.12.2014

¶25

EXT. P5(a)- A TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P5

¶26

EXT. P6- A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 7.1.2015

¶27

EXT. P6(a)- TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P6

¶28

EXT. P7- A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE LIE AND NATURE OF THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OF THE PETITIONER

¶29

EXT. P8- A TRUE COPY OF THE PRIOR SALE DEED NO.1729/1994 DATED 15.3.1994

¶30

EXT. P8(a)- TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P8

¶31

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL.

¶32

/TRUE COPY/

¶33

P.S. TO JUDGE

¶34

Dama Seshadri Naidu, J.

¶35

W.P.(C)No.3709 of 2015 K

¶36

Dated this the 12^th day of February, 2015

¶37

JUDGMENT

¶38

In the light of the ratio laid down in Padmini v. State of Kerala (1999 (3) KLT 465) and Praveen v. Land Revenue Commissioner (2010 (2) KLT 617), the present writ petition is also disposed of on the same lines applying the ratio laid down by this Court in the said decision, thereby quashing Exhibit P4.

¶39

Consequently, the second respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioner for building permission afresh, if necessary, by referring the matter to the District Town Planner, and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶40

Dama Seshadri Naidu, Judge

¶41

tkv

K.K.John v. Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.K.John v. Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.a.C.Rajan Vs State of Kerala

Anilkumar K Vs the Chief Secretary

Stanley Rapheal Vs State of Kerala

Martin Vs Cheranallur Grama Panchayath

M.I.Shajahan Vs Alice George

U.P.Thyagu Vs Welfare Fund Inspector, Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Board