Allowed

Kamalam v. the Village Officer

Kerala HC1 Aug 2023WP(C)/2825/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed the writ petition clarifying that storing agricultural seeds in an enclosed cellar does not constitute residential use. The tax levied on the cellar portion was set aside as inconsistent with Section 6 of the Kerala Building Tax Act, which exempts non-residential storage structures.

What did the court decide?

The present writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders are set aside.

Kamalam Vs the Village Officer — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 2825 OF 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

KAMALAM, AGED 57 YEARS

¶8

EDAPPAD HOUSE, KAKKAVAYAL, MUTTIL SOUTH VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD

¶9

BY ADV P.P.JACOB

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 THE VILLAGE OFFICER

¶12

MUTTIL SOUTH VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD - 673 576

¶13

2 THE TAHSILDAR

¶14

VYTHIRI, VYTHIRI TALUK OFFICE, WAYANAD - 673 576

¶15

3 THE SUB COLLECTOR/REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD - 670 645

¶16

4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD - 673 121

¶17

5 THE MUTTIL GRAMA PANCHAYATH MUTTIL, WAYANAD - 673122, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶18

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER RESHMITA RAMACHANDRAN

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

W.P.(C) No.2825/2019

¶21

-2-

¶22

J U D G M E N T

¶23

Heard Mr P P Jacob learned Counsel for the petitioner,

¶24

and Ms Rasmitha Ramachandran learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶25

The challenge in the present writ petition is the levy of building tax on the cellar portion of the petitioner's residential premises, which is being used to keep the agricultural produce.

¶26

The inspection of the premises of the petitioner was carried out by the Deputy Collector (LA). In the inspection, it

¶27

was found that the ground floor and first floor of the building are used for residential purposes. The cellar portion with 106.02 sq meter space was set apart for preserving agricultural seeds and keeping agricultural articles. However, it was noticed that the cellar portion was enclosed in the form of

¶28

W.P.(C) No.2825/2019

¶29

-3-

¶30

rooms by erecting walls, and therefore it was held that this cellar portion could not be exempted from the levy of tax.

¶31

Section 6 of the Kerala Building Tax Act 1975 provides as under:

¶32

“6. Determination of plinth area. – The plinth area of a building for the purposes of this Act, shall be the plinth area of the building as specified in the plan approved by the local authority or such other authorities as may be specified by Government in this behalf and verified by the assessing authority in such manner as may be prescribed.

¶33

Provided that the plinth area of a garage or any other erection or structure appurtenant to a residential building used for storage of firewood or for any non-residential purpose shall not be taken into account for determining the plinth area of that building.”

¶34

In view of the proviso of Section 6 of the Kerala

¶35

Building Tax Act, the determinative factor is the use of the

¶36

place as storage of firewood or any non-residential purpose. Admittedly, the cellar portion is not used for residential

¶37

W.P.(C) No.2825/2019

¶38

-4-

¶39

purposes but for keeping agricultural seeds and other agricultural products. Mere compartmentalisation of the cellar portion does not change its nature of being used for nonresidential purposes. When the Deputy Collector (LA) himself has found that the cellar portion was not used for residential purposes, levy of tax on the ground that the cellar portion has been compartmentalised by erecting walls will not change its nature for being used for non-residential purposes. The levy of tax on the said portion on which the cellar has been erected is against the provisions of Section 6 of the Act, and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.

¶40

Therefore, the present writ petition is allowed. The

¶41

impugned orders Exts.P1, P2 and P7 are set aside.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE

¶44

jjj

¶45

W.P.(C) No.2825/2019

¶46

-5-

¶47

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2825/2019

¶48

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶49

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 18.10.2016
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 31.08.2017
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 22.01.2018
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STAY PETITION WITH AFFIDAVIT FILED BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 22.01.2018
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 25.04.2018
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 18.06.2018
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 31.08.2017

Kamalam v. the Village Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamalam v. the Village Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Hussain Vs the State Transport Commissioner

Aishabi Vs Joy K.B

Renjini Mohanan Vs Axis Bank Ltd.

Shibu O.U. Vs the Deputy Tahsildar (Rr)

Careon Healthcare Solutions Private Limited, Vs Union of India

Nirapara Roller Flour Mills Private Limited Vs the State Tax Officer