Allowed

Sudarsanan v. District Collector, Kasaragod

Kerala HC16 Jun 2022WP(C)/6649/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a writ petition quashing orders refusing to accept basic land tax due to pending civil litigation. The Court held that civil pendency cannot justify tax refusal, directing authorities to accept the tax while retaining the civil court's jurisdiction on title.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition allowed; Exts.P7 and P10 quashed; direction to respondents 2 to 4 to accept basic tax covered by Ext.P5.

Sudarsanan Vs District Collector, Kasaragod — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 26TH JYAISHTA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 6649 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

SUDARSANAN, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O. VASUDEVA KURUP, KALLAMALA HOUSE, KANHANGAD SOUTH P. O., KANHANGAD VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 315.

¶8

BY ADVS.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN & SHRI.ABRAHAM MATHAN.

¶9

RESPONDENTS :

¶10

1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 123.

¶11

2 SUB COLLECTOR, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 315.

¶12

3 TAHSILDAR, HOSDRUG, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 315.

¶13

4 VILLAGE OFFICER, KLAYIKODE KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 313.

¶14

ADDL.R5 TO R7 IMPLEADED :

¶15

5 C.INDIRA, AGED 67 YEARS, W/O (L) KUHIKRISHNAKURUP, RESIDING AT NEETHI NIKETHAN, COURT ROAD, NEAR POLICE STATION, THALIPARAMBA P.O., THALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶16

6 C.ANANDA KRISHNAN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.(L) KUHIKRISHNAKURUP, RESIDING AT NEETHI NIKETHAN, COURT ROAD, NEAR POLICE STATION, THALIPARAMBA P.O., THALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶17

W.P(C) No.6649 of 2021 2

¶18

7 C.AMBIKA, AGED 48 YEARS D/O. (L) KUHIKRISHNAKURUP, RESIDING AT NEETHI NIKETHAN, COURT ROAD, NEAR POLICE STATION, THALIPARAMBA P.O., THALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶19

(ADDL.R5 TO R7 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 25.3.2021 IN I.A.1/2021 IN WPC 6649/2021).

¶20

SRI. K. M. FAISAL, GP

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

W.P(C) No.6649 of 2021 3

¶23

T.R.RAVI, J.

¶24

W.P(C) No.6649 of 2021

¶25

Dated this the 16^th day of June, 2022.

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

The writ petition has been filed for quashing Exts.P7 and P10 orders and for a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to pay the basic tax/land tax covered by Ext.P5. In Ext.P7, the third respondent has stated that since civil proceedings are pending regarding the property, the basic tax will be collected only after the civil court finally decides on the matter.

¶28

The petitioner had challenged Ext.P7 before the second respondent, who had issued Ext.P10 order, wherein also the very same reason is repeated that the tax can be accepted only after the civil dispute is finally over. It is trite law that the pendency of civil litigation cannot be a reason for the refusal of acceptance of basic tax. The basic tax is primarily a fiscal issue and merely because a person has paid the basic tax, there cannot be a conclusive proof of

¶29

W.P(C) No.6649 of 2021 4

¶30

title in the person who paid the tax. The title is a matter on which the final word is that of the civil court. In such circumstances, there is no justification for not accepting the basic tax.

¶31

In the said circumstances, the writ petition is allowed. Exts.P7 and P10 are quashed. There will be a direction to the respondents 2 to 4 to accept the basic tax/land tax for the property covered by Ext.P5 from the petitioner. It is made clear that this Court is not rendering any finding on the title to the property which will be subject to the final decision of the civil court in the matter.

¶32

T.R.RAVI, JUDGE

¶33

amk

¶34

W.P(C) No.6649 of 2021 5

¶35

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6649/2021

¶36

PETITIO	NER'S EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT	P1 A TRUE COPY OF FDIA NO.1069 OF	ORDER DATED 28.10.2005 IN 1993.
EXHIBIT	P2 A TRUE COPY OF	I.A.NO.751 OF 2014.
EXHIBIT	P3 A TRUE COPY OF 2014 IN FDIA NO O.S.NO.21 OF 19	ORDER IN I.A.NO.751 OF .1069 OF 1993 IN 92 DATED 12.06.2015.
EXHIBIT	P4 A TRUE COPY OF DECREE IN I.A.N NO.1069 OF 1993 DATED 12.06.201	SUPPLEMENTARY FINAL O.751 OF 2014 IN FDIA IN O.S.NO.21 OF 1992 5.
EXHIBIT	P5 A TRUE COPY OF AND THE DELIVER	WARRANT, DELIVERY REPORT Y RECEIPT.
EXHIBIT	P6 A TRUE COPY OF IN A.S.NO.75 OF	JUDGMENT DATED 03.07.2017 2015.
EXHIBIT	P7 A TRUE COPY OF RESPONDENT DATE	ORDER PASSED BY THE 3RD D 29.08.2016.
EXHIBIT	P8 A TRUE COPY OF SENT BY THE 2ND ADVOCATE GENERA	LETTER DATED 13.03.2019 RESPONDENT TO THE L.
EXHIBIT	P9 A TRUE COPY OF SENT BY THE 2ND ADVOCATE GENERA	LETTER DATED 25.11.2019 RESPONDENT TO THE L.
EXHIBIT	P10 A TRUE COPY OF FROM THE 2ND RE	ORDER DATED 03.07.2020 SPONDENT.

Sudarsanan v. District Collector, Kasaragod

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudarsanan v. District Collector, Kasaragod

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

Afsath C Vs State of Kerala

Asaharuddeen.K.K Vs the District Collector, Kannur

Palempadiyan Alavi Vs State of Kerala

Jalaja K., Vs Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Linoj.M.S. Vs State of Kerala

John Thomas Vs the Taluk Land Board