Disposed

M/S.Sree Sakthi Paper Mills Ltd. v. Pariyaram Grama Panchayath

Kerala HC24 Jun 2022WP(C)/3560/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Upon finding that property tax was subsequently redetermined under G.O.No.88/2013 making the impugned demands infructuous, the court disposed of the writ petition without explicit operative orders allowing or dismissing the specific reliefs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with a recording that the impugned demands were rendered infructuous due to subsequent redetermination of tax.

M/S.Sree Sakthi Paper Mills Ltd. Vs Pariyaram Grama… — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 3560 OF 2015

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S.SREE SAKTHI PAPER MILLS LTD AGED 63 YEARS 'SREE KAILAS', 39/2724 - A, PALIAM ROAD, KOCHI - 682016, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR (OPERATIONS) SRI. N.PURUSHOTHAMA PRABHU BY ADVS. SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN SMT.R.RANJANIE

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 PARIYARAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH REP BY ITS SECRETARY, PARIYARAM P.O., THRISSUR - 680 721

¶10

2 SECRETARY, PARIYARAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH PARIYARAM P.O., THRISSUR - 680 721. BY ADV SRI.SHEEJO CHACKO

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING

¶12

W.P.(C) No.3560 of 2015

¶13

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Dated this the 24^th day of June 2022

¶16

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

¶17

i) Call for the records leading to Ext.P5 to P12 and quash the same by issuing the writ of certiorari.

¶18

ii) Stay all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P5 to P12 including steps for recovery of the amount demanded therein, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶19

iiii) Pass such other orders, writ or directions as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper.

¶20

The subject issue relates to the demand of property tax raised against

¶21

the petitioner company registered under the Companies Act as per Exts.P5 to

¶22

P12. Anyhow a detailed deliberation of the adjudication is not required since in

¶23

the counter affidavit filed by the Pariyaram Grama Panchayat, it is stated that tax was re-determined by the Grama Panchayat. The relevant paragraph of the

¶24

counter affidavit is extracted hereunder for convenience and future purpose:

¶25

“But after the issuance of demand notice impugned in this writ petition, the government has issued G.O.No.88/2013 LSGD dated 13.3.2013 directing the redetermination of property tax on the basis of plinth area and any increase of property tax shall not exceed 150 percentage of the existing property tax of the building. Accordingly, property tax was redetermined as shown below:

¶26

W.P.(C) No.3560 of 2015

¶27

¶28

Sl.No.	Building Number	Area	Use	Property tax redetermined on the basis of G.O.P.No.86/2013
1	13/160	38M²	Industry	410
2	13/161	96M²	office	4536
3	13/162	71M²	Industry	410
4	13/163	111M²	Commercial (godown)	1531
5	13/164	1351M²	Industry	3982
6	13/165	5492M²	Industry	41712

¶29

In this connection, it is most respectfully submitted that, the aforesaid building is sold to Smt.Swapna Sabu and Ashish Sabu, Kurumassery, Parakkadavu and they have remitted property tax since 201314 and property tax now continued to be paid without any default. The property tax has been substantially reduced, when redetermined on the basis of G.O.No.88/2013. No grievance subsists in the above matter and writ petition is only to be dismissed.”

¶30

Taking into account the said aspect, onething is clear though the

¶31

subject challenge has made Exhibits P5 to P12 demands has virtually become infructuous. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, recording the above aspect.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

SHAJI P.CHALY, JUDGE

¶34

smv

¶35

W.P.(C) No.3560 of 2015

¶36

¶37

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3560/2015

¶38

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶39

P1- THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT P2- THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE CHEQUE FOR RS.24549/P3- THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED EVIDENCING THE RECEIPT OF PROPERTY TAX FOR THE YEAR 2014-2015 P4- THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH CHEQUE FOR RS. 24550/P5- PHOTOCOPY OF NOITCE DATED 1.1.2015 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT AND TRANSLATION P6-PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE DATED 9.1.2015 ISSSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND TRANSLATION P7- PHOTOCOPY OF DEMAND NOTICE FOR BUILDING BEARING NO.13/160 AND TRANSLATION P8- PHOTOCOPY OF DEMAND NOTICE FOR BUILDING BEARING NO.13/161 AND TRANSLATION P9- PHOTOCOPY OF DEMAND NOTICE FOR BUILDING BEARING NO. 13/162 AND TRANSLATION P10- PHOTOCOPY OF DEMAND NOTICE FOR BUILDING BEARING NO. 13/163 AND TRANSLATION P11- PHOTOTCOPY OF DEMAND NOTICE FOR BUILDING BEARING NO. 13/164 AND TRANSLATION P12- PHOTOCOPY OF DEMAND NOTICE FOR BUILDING BEARING NO. 13/165 AND TRANSLATION

M/S.Sree Sakthi Paper Mills Ltd. v. Pariyaram Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Sree Sakthi Paper Mills Ltd. v. Pariyaram Grama Panchayath

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

Roy C.A. Vs N. Geetha

Rajesh.v.R Vs Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

Reni Biju Vs the Kottayam Muncipality

Zavier Vs the State of Kerala

Kunnampalli Unnikrishnan Vs the State of Kerala

Elsy Joseph Vs Laiju