Partly allowed

T.K. George v. Kothamangalam Municipality

Kerala HC14 Jun 2023WP(C)/17044/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging enhanced property tax demand notices, the Court set aside the notices (Exts.P3 and P4) and directed the respondents to consider the petitioners' representations and pass fresh assessment orders in accordance with the Act, Rules, Government Orders, and the 100% enhancement cap within two months.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the impugned demand notices (Exts.P3 and P4). Direct respondents to consider petitioners' representation and pass fresh assessment orders within two months.

T.K. George Vs Kothamangalam Municipality — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 24TH JYAISHTA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO.17044 OF 2018

¶6

PETITIONERS :-

¶7

1 T.K. GEORGE, AGED 68 YEARS S/O.KURIAKOSE, THAKIDIYIL HOUSE, M.A.COLLEGE.P.O, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691.

¶8

2 ANCY GEORGE, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.T.K.GEORGE, THAKIDIYIL HOUSE, M.A.COLLEGE.P.O, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.C.DILIP SRI.R.PRADEEP

¶10

RESPONDENTS :-

¶11

1 KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶12

2 THE SECRETARY KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY, KOTHAMANGLAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691.

¶13

BY ADVS. SRI.PEEYUS A KOTTAM SRI.JOICE GEORGE

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) NO.17044 OF 2018

¶16

-: 2 :-

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Dated this the 14th day of June, 2023

¶19

This writ petition is filed challenging Exts.P3 and P4 demand notices issued to the petitioners on reassessment of property tax from the year 2013-'14 onwards.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the property tax of the existing building of the petitioners has been revised and the demand raised now would show that the enhancement effected is without considering the inhibitions that the enhancement of property tax in respect of Municipalities cannot be more than 100% of the pre-existing rates. The learned counsel would also place reliance on a Government Order dated 6.3.2019 to contend that enhancement is limited to 100% as also that the enhancement is to be made effective only from 1.4.2016.

¶21

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that in the light of the Government Order, a reassessment of tax will have to be carried out by the Municipality.

¶22

In the above view of the matter, Exts.P3 and P4 are set aside. There will be a direction to the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners and to pass fresh orders

¶23

WP(C) NO.17044 OF 2018

¶24

-: 3 :-

¶25

assessing the property tax in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules as also the Government Orders including the Government Order dated 6.3.2019. Appropriate assessment orders shall be passed, after hearing the petitioner also, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶26

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Jvt/22.6.2023

WP(C) NO.17044 OF 2018

¶31

-: 4 :-

¶32

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17044/2018

¶33

PETITIONER EXHIBITS :-

¶34

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE PHOTO COPY OF BUILDING TAX RECEIPT DATED NIL FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR BUILDING NO. XV1/291 (OLD NO X11/10A) OF KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE PHOTO COPY OF BUILDING TAX RECEIPT DATED NIL FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR BUILDING NO. XV1/289 (OLD NO X11/10) OF KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE PHOTO COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 19/12/2017 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR BUILDING NO.XVI/291
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE PHOTO COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 19/12/2017 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR BUILDING BNO.XV1/289
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE PHOTO COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 17/2/2018 JOINTLY SUBMITTEDBY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE PHOTO COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 17/2/2018 SUBMITTED BY THE FIRST PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE PHOTO COPY ORDER DATED 5/3/2018 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF BUILDING NO. XV1/291.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE PHOTO COPY ORDER DATED 5/3/2018 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT INRESPECT OF BUILDING NO XV1/289.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE PHOTO COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER, G.O-M.S.NO 144/15 DATED 27/4/2015
RESPONDENT	EXHIBITS :-
EXHIBIT R1(	a) TRUE COPY OF THE SIMILAR ORDER IN W.P.(C) 4793/2018 DATED 21.02.2018 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

T.K. George v. Kothamangalam Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.K. George v. Kothamangalam Municipality

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

Thomas O. D Vs R. Anand

Raigan George Vs Jessy Augustine

Abu C. Abraham Vs Human Rights Commission

A.R.Associates, Vs State of Kerala

Vijayan Pillai Vs the State of Kerala

Hi Decors Vs Commercial Tax Officer