Allowed

Dr.S.Ramalingam, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Jun 2020WA/579/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed this writ appeal directed against a demand for building tax because the Assessing Officer had failed to comply with a previous appellate order. Exhibits P5, P7 and P8 were set aside for reconsideration in accordance with the appellate directives.

What did the court decide?

Exhibits P5, P7 and P8 set aside for reconsideration to comply with the appellate order at Exhibit P4.

Dr.S.Ramalingam, Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

¶6

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 25TH JYAISHTA, 1942

¶7

WA.No.579 OF 2020

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 31165/2019(U) DATED 19.11.2019 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶9

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶10

DR.S.RAMALINGAM, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.SIVARAMAN, POONKAVU, MALAYALAPUZHA, KONNI, PIN-689666.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.VISHAK.K.JOHNSON SRI.BIJU C.VARUGHESE SMT.BINDU N.RAJAN SRI.S.S.ARAVIND

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶14

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645.

¶15

3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA-691523.

¶16

4 THE TAHSILDAR, OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA-689691.

¶17

- 2 -

¶18

W.A.No.579 of 2020

¶19

5 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR(RR), OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR), COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645.

¶20

R1-R5 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ

¶21

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

- 3 -

¶23

W.A.No.579 of 2020

¶24

K.Vinod Chandran & T.R.Ravi, JJ.

¶25

W.A.No.579 of 2020

¶26

Dated, this the 15^th day of June, 2020

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

Vinod Chandran, J.

¶29

The appeal is against the judgment of the learned Single Judge in a writ petition filed against the demand made for building tax. On going through the records, we found that by Exhibit P4 the Revenue Divisional Officer had remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer, in appeal. We, therefore, directed the Government Pleader to get instructions as to whether the appellate authority's order at Exhibit P4 has been complied with.

¶30

2. Pursuant to our direction, the learned Senior Government Pleader has filed a memo, producing the statement of facts received from the Tahsildar. It has been admitted that the 4^th respondent-Tahsildar, Konni has not passed an order of assessment in compliance with the order passed by the appellate authority, at Exhibit P4. In such circumstances, Exhibits P5, P7 and P8 are set aside, only for the purpose of re-consideration as directed in Exhibit P4. It is made clear that the order shall be passed in accordance with law and in accordance with the directions in Exhibit P4.

¶31

- 4 -

¶32

W.A.No.579 of 2020

¶33

The Writ Appeal is allowed, without any

¶34

observation on the merits of the assessment. No costs.

¶35

Sd/K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE

¶36

Sd/T.R.RAVI JUDGE

¶37

Vku/-

¶38

[ True copy ]

Dr.S.Ramalingam, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.S.Ramalingam, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sabith B., Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Limited

M/S.E.v.Mathai/Sons Vs State of Kerala

S.Gopal Kamath(Cochin), Vs the Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise

Carmel College, Mala Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs M/S.Pvs Memorial Hospital Ltd.

State of Kerala Vs Pvs Memorial Hospital Limited