Dismissed

G.Chandra Babu v. Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

Kerala HC23 Nov 2018WP(C)/5736/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the writ petition hearing objections for non-compliance with a Tribunal order regarding building occupancy and tax assessment. The Court found that interim directions for provisional numbering and tax assessment were complied with. The petition was closed, preserving liberties granted by the Tribunal for further legal action.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was closed after agreeing that interim directions for provisional numbering and tax assessment were complied with.

G.Chandra Babu Vs Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram — Municipal and Town Planning | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 5736 of 2017

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

G.CHANDRA BABU

¶8

AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.GANGADHARAN,MANAGING DIRECTOR, SREEDHANYA HOME (P) LTD,T.C.NO.IX/875, SREEDHANYA, SASTHAMANGALAM (PO),THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 010.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.AJIT G.ANJARLEKAR SRI.GOVIND PADMANAABHAN SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. SRI.V.SANJEEV

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,CORPORATION BUILDINGS, PALAYAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

¶12

2 THE SECRETARY CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,CORPORATION BUILDINGS,PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

¶13

BY ADVS.

¶14

SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR (SR.) SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON(SR.) SRI.P.K.MANOJ KUMAR,SC,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No. 5736 of 2017 2

¶17

V.G.ARUN, J.

¶18

W.P.(C)No.5736 of 2017

¶19

Dated this the 23^rd day of November, 2018

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The petitioner had constructed a building in his property comprised in Survey Nos. 264/15, 264/7, 29/A-1-2-1, 29/A12-2, 43/1, 43/2 of Cheruvaikkal Village. Even though, after completion of construction, the petitioner preferred an application for issuance of occupancy certificate, tax assessment and allotment of Door Number, action on those applications was unduly delayed by the respondents. Thereupon, the petitioner approached the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions seeking a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to proceed as if occupancy certificate has been issued (deemed occupancy) and also for a direction to the respondents to conduct site inspection within a period of 15 days, so as to assess the building tax as per law. By Ext P1 order, the Tribunal declared that the appellant is entitled to proceed as if the occupancy certificate was granted to him. The Tribunal reserved the liberty of the respondents to proceed against the appellant and the building, if the construction

¶22

WP(C).No. 5736 of 2017 3

¶23

offends any of the provisions of the law. There is a further direction to the Secretary to conduct site inspection and to ascertain whether the construction is in violation of the permit or any other provisions of law. It is stated that in the event of the Secretary finding that though the building is completed, there are illegalities in the construction, he shall provisionally number the building as provided under Section 242(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act and levy tax as per Section 242(1) of the Act. The Writ Petition has been filed on the allegation that despite repeated representations, the respondents are refusing to comply with the directions contained in Ext P1 order. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to assess tax and number the residential cum commercial building constructed by the petitioner. On 7.4.2017 this court had issued an interim direction to the respondent Corporation to provisionally number the building within a period of three weeks from the date of the order and also to assess provisionally, the tax in respect of the building. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits and the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents concur that interim direction has been complied with by provisionally numbering the building and assessing the

¶24

WP(C).No. 5736 of 2017 4

¶25

building to tax provisionally. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that his grievance stands substantially allayed in view of the provisional numbering and assessment of tax carried out by the Corporation.

¶26

In such circumstances, the Writ Petition is closed leaving the liberties granted by the Tribunal in Ext P1 order to either parties, in tact. It is also clarified that it will be open for either of the parties to take necessary action in accordance with law, with respect to the further proceedings, if any.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN, JUDGE

cms

WP(C).No. 5736 of 2017 5

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶33

EXHIBIT-P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.09.2016 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN APPEAL NO.1142 OF 2014. EXHIBIT-P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.11.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXTS NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE cms

G.Chandra Babu v. Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Chandra Babu v. Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

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

G.Jacob Vs Managing Director

G. Jacob Vs M.D, Kerala Water Authority

V.K.Pramod Vs District Collector

M/S.Prima Agro (P) Limited Vs District Industries Centre

C.Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Subin P.S` Vs the Deputy Tahasildar (R.R) Chavakad