Disposed

Yogini Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. the Tahasildar, Tirur Taluk

Kerala HC3 Jun 2024WP(C)/17867/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking directions to accept land tax. Noting that a related writ concerning land possession has been dismissed, the Court directed the respondents to accept tax upon receipt of an application.

What did the court decide?

The respondents shall accept land tax in respects of Exhibits P1 and P2 if an application is submitted by the petitioner.

Yogini Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Tahasildar, Tirur Taluk — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 17867 OF 2020

¶5

PETITIONERS:

¶6

YOGINI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.
KANNAMPALAYAM, SULUR P.O., COIMBATORE DISTRICT, TAMIL
NADU, -641 402,REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
P.VASUDEVAN, S/O. JANAKI AMMA, AGED 71 YEARS, PUTHERI
HOUSE, CHENGAMANAD P.O., ALUVA

¶7

BY ADV BINOY VASUDEVAN

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1THE TAHASILDAR, TIRUR TALUK,
TIRUR TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, TIRUR, MALPPURAM DISTRICT-
676 101.

¶10

2THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
IRUMBILIYAM VILLAGE, IRUMBILIYAM P.O., MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT-676 505.

¶11

BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

¶14

WPC No.17867/2020

¶15

P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶16

================================

¶17

WP(C) No.17867 of 2020

¶18

=================================

¶19

Dated this the 3^rd day of June, 2024

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

¶22

i) “Issue a writ of Mandamus or other appropriate Writ, Orders or directions, commanding the 2^nd respondent to accept the land tax in respect of the properties covered by Exhibits P-1 and P-2 documents as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court;

¶23

ii) Issue a writ of Mandamus or other appropriate Writ, Orders or directions, commanding the 1^st respondent to issue appropriate directions to the 2^nd respondent by considering Exhibit P-4 and to accept tax in respect of the properties covered by Exhibits P-1 and P-2 documents in the interest of justice;

¶24

iii) Render such other orders or directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem just, fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case. [sic]

¶25

Petitioner is a Private Limited Company who owns

¶26

properties covered by Exhibits P1 and Exhibit P2 in Irumbliyam

¶27

Village, Tirur Taluk, Malappuram District. It is submitted that

¶28

the property was purchased in the year 2007. After, the purchase

¶29

WPC No.17867/2020

¶30

¶31

of the property, petitioner had effected mutation and was

¶32

remitting land tax is the submission. According to the petitioner, after 2015, citing some disputes raised by the children of the predecessor in the interest of the petitioner, the tax is not been collected from the petitioner. It is submitted that, when the petitioner was proposing to make certain construction in the property, the petitioner came to know that the tax is not being collected from 2016 onwards. Hence, the petitioner preferred Exhibit P4 before the 1^st respondent seeking for a direction to the 2^nd respondent to accept tax from him in respect of the properties. Since, there is no action, this writ petition is filed.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶34

The counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions raised in this writ petition. The Government Pleader takes me through the statement filed by the 1^st respondent. The relevant portion of the statement is filed by the 1^st respondent is extracted hereunder;

¶35

WPC No.17867/2020

¶36

¶37

“3. It is also found that the above Ramakrishnan has also filed W.P© No.32652/2014 before the Hon’ble High Court on 23.11.2014 and the judgment in this case is passed on 12.10.2018. On complying with the order of the Hon’ble High Court in W.P© No.32652/2014 dated 12.10.2018, the 2^nd respondent called for a detailed report in this matter. After conducting site inspection and further enquiry Village Officer furnished a report on 11.07.2019 and the following are the present holders of the land.

¶38

(a) Sri.Saidalavi, S/o Ahammedkutty -60.30 Ares

¶39

(b) Sri.Ali, /o Kunjimoideen -14.68 Ares

¶40

(c) Sri.Aboobacker, S/o Moideenkutty-1.4123 hectres

¶41

(d) Sri.P.Vasudevan, Director of

¶42

(e) Yogini Properties Private Limited-2.499 Hectres

¶43

Total -4.661 Hectres

¶44

4. The basic tax is being collected from these holders through online payment system and the Village Officer reported that the Basic Tax is also received from the Yogini Properties Private Limited till the financial year 2015-16.

¶45

5. Meanwhile, contempt case No.1422/2019 was filed before the above Pottakkalathil Ramakrishnan to comply the judgment in W.P(C) No.32652/2014 and this Contempt case is dismissed on 17.02.2020 stating that the judgment dated 12.10.2016 in W.P(C) No.32652/2014 is recalled and Review Petition is accordingly allowed and writ petiton is restored on file. The W.P(C) No.32652/2014 is filed with regard to

¶46

WPC No.17867/2020

¶47

¶48

the possession of land in question is still pending before the Hon’ble Court. The Basic Tax was not accepted from the petitoner from the financial year 2016-2017 onwards.” [sic]

¶49

The main reason for not accepting the tax is the pendency of WP(C) No.32652/2014. The above writ petition is dismissed by this Court today. In such circumstances, there may not be any problem in

¶50

accepting the tax from the petitioner.

¶51

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶52

(i) The respondents will accept the land tax in respect of the properties covered by Exts.P1 and P2, if an application to that effect is submitted by the petitioner, in the light of the fact that WP(C) No.32652/2014 is already disposed of.

¶53

Sd/-

¶54

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE

SLR

WPC No.17867/2020

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17867/2020

¶59

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶60

EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.1290/07 OF
S.R.O. KUTTIPPURAM
EXHIBIT P1ATRUE COPY OF PURCHASE CERTIFICATE
NO.467 OF 1993 ISSUED BY THE LAND
TRIBUNAL TIRUR
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.1291/07 OF
S.R.O KUTTIPPURAM
EXHIBIT P2ATRUE COPY OF PURCHASE CERTIFICATE
NO.459 OF 1993 ISSUED BY THE LAND
TRIBUNAL TIRUR
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED
25.06.2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT DATED 07.08.2020

Yogini Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. the Tahasildar, Tirur Taluk

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogini Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. the Tahasildar, Tirur Taluk

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devarajan Vs the Secretary

Brothers Sports Club Vs State of Kerala

K.Sreelatha Vs the Commissioner of Land Revenue

Remi P.T Vs the State of Kerala

Syamlal H.S Vs the State of Kerala

Saradha M.K. Vs Cochin University of Science and Technol