Petitioners challenged revenue recovery proceedings, asserting resignation from the company before liabilities arose. The High Court disposed of the writ, directing the Tahsildar to consider the resignation claim within two weeks.
Directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioners' claim of resignation and dispose of the matter within two weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1942
WP(C).No.17883 OF 2014(I)
PETITIONER/S:
1 LIBIN, AGED 25 YEARS S/O.FRANCIS SOURI,KODUVELIPARAMBIL HOUSE,KOTHAD,KADAMAKKUDY VILLAGE,KANAYANNUR TALUK,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.PIN-682027.
3 RENJITH, AGED 27 YEARS S/O.GOIPI,KOTTARATHIL PARAMBIL HOUSE,NO.46/1059,PATTATH ROAD,CHALIKKAVATTOM,VENNALA.P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-682028.
BY ADV. SRI.T.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE,KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682031.
2 TAHSILDARRR KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM-682011.
WP(C).No.17883 OF 2014(I) ..2..
6 STEEL BIRD ELEVATORS ESCALATORS PVT.LTD BEARING ITS OFFICE AT CC 27/1489,IST FLOOR HAPPY DALE,KOYITHARA ROAD,PANAMPILLY NAGAR.P.O,ERNAKULAM682036,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR,SEBASTINE MALIEKKAL,S/O.JOSEPH,MALIEKKAL HOUSE,THOPPUMPADY,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN:682005.
R1-5 BY GP M.M.JASMINE R7 BY ADV. SRI.BIMAL PRASAD
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.17883 OF 2014(I) ..3..
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 10th day of June 2020
The petitioners challenge the revenue recovery
proceedings on the premise that they have resigned from the Director Board of the 6th respondent Company
and the revenue recovery proceedings pertain to liabilities incurred by the Company after their resignation. The petitioners have highlighted their grievances in Ext.P7 representation, which is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent.
WP(C).No.17883 OF 2014(I) ..4..
an outer limit of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The interim order will continue to
be in force till a decision, as directed above is taken by
the 2nd respondent.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
SB/10/06/2020
Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE
WP(C).No.17883 OF 2014(I) ..5..
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P6 EXT.P6 DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT,TAHSILDAR DATED 6/6/2014 EXHIBIT P7 EXT.P7 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE IST AND 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P8 EXT.P8 COPY OF THE REGARDING THE TAX PAYMENT OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT FROM 1/4/2012 TO 30/6/2012.
// true copy //
P.A to Judge
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should dispose of the writ petition challenging revenue recovery proceedings where petitioners claim resignation from the company prior to liability period.
Whether the vendors can be held liable for tax demands exceeding the period of their service.
How to dispose of a writ petition returning the matter to the tax authority for consideration.
Libin
Falgunan
Renjith
District Collector, Kakkanad
Tahsildar Kanayannur
Village Officer Kadamakudy
V.G. Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
