Disposed

M/S. Panazan Enterprises (P) Ltd., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Jul 2024WP(C)/3448/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court directed that if petitioners (MSME units) have grievances regarding property tax fixation, they may submit representations to the Municipality and Panchayat. The authorities must consider them after an opportunity of hearing and decide within two months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to approach respondent Nos. 2 and 4 with representations; authorities to consider after hearing and decide within two months.

M/S. Panazan Enterprises (P) Ltd., Vs State of Kerala — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 24TH ASHADHA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 3448 OF 2024

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1M/S. PANAZAN ENTERPRISES (P) LTD.,
EAST OF COURT JUNCTION, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR JOSE J.
PONNEZHATH, PIN – 688524.

¶8

2 M/S. HOME CARE, 5/284 A, B, PONNEZHATH TOWER, A.C. ROAD, SOUTH COURT JUNCTION,CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT ,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, JOSE J. PONNEZHATH, PIN – 688524.

¶9

3 M/S.HOME CARE BHARAT GAS, 5/105/D, PONNEZHATH BUILDING, T.B. ROAD, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT ,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, XAVIER J. PONNEZHATH, PIN – 688524.

¶10

BY ADVS.
V.N.HARIDAS
SAIFUDEEN T.S
B.SHAMEERA
NIMISHAMOL SASIDHARAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT FOR
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, SECRETARIAT ANNEXE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695001.

¶13

2 CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE,CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 688524.

¶14

3 THE SECRETARY, CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 688524.

¶15

4 VAYALAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,OFFICE OF THE VAYALAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT,VAYALAR P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 688536.

¶16

WP(C) NO. 3448 OF 2024 2

¶17

5THE SECRETARY,
VAYALAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT,OFFICE OF THE VAYALAR GRAMA
PANCHAYAT,VAYALAR P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN –
688536.

¶18

BY ADVS.

¶19

SRI.J.OMPRAKASH, SC, CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY
SRI. R. RAJPRADEEP, SC, VAYALAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT
SMT. THUSHARA JAMES, SR.GP

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C) NO. 3448 OF 2024 3

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

The petitioners have approached this Court being aggrieved by the levy of property tax by including the units (buildings) belonging to them in the category of the commercial buildings and treating such buildings as Malls and Supermarkets for the levy of property tax. It is the case of the petitioners that they are MSME Units and they have to be classified along with MSME industrial units and levying a higher tax on them is per se illegal and unsustainable. It is submitted that the classification of the units belonging to the petitioners as MSME SERVICE ENTERPRISES and imposition of a higher rate of tax is impermissible in law.

¶24

The learned counsel appearing for the 4^th respondent submits that the property tax levied on the 3^rd petitioner has already been substantially reduced by the Panchayat from a sum of Rs.11,421/- to Rs.2,615/- (basic property tax exclusive of any Cess). It is submitted that the petitioners cannot have any grievance in the matter of fixation of property tax at the above rate and if they have any further grievance, they may make a suitable representation to the Panchayat and the same will be considered in accordance with the law.

¶25

WP(C) NO. 3448 OF 2024 4

¶26

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent also submits that if the petitioners have any grievance regarding the fixation of property tax, their representation can be suitably considered by the Municipality.

¶27

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader and the respective Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 to 5, it is directed that if the petitioners have any further grievance regarding the fixation of property tax in respect of the units functioning within the jurisdiction of respondent Nos.2 to 5, it would be open to them to approach respondent Nos.2 and 4 with suitable representations. On such representations being received, the competent authority of respondent Nos. 2 and 4 will consider such representation and take a decision thereon in accordance with the law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. If such representation is filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, the competent authority will take a decision in the matter without further delay and at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of such representation.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

GOPINATH P.
 JUDGE

¶30

Sru

¶31

WP(C) NO. 3448 OF 2024 5

¶32

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3448/2024

¶33

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1A TRUE COPY OF THE MSME UDYAM REGISTRATION
DETAILS OF THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED
20.11.2020.
Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF THE TRADE LICENCE ISSUED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER
DATED 30.06.2022.
Exhibit P3A TRUE COPY OF THE MSME UDYAM REGISTRATION
DETAILS OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED NIL.
Exhibit P4A TRUE COPY OF THE TRADE LICENCE ISSUED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER
DATED 25.05.2023.
Exhibit P5A TRUE COPY OF THE MSME UDYAM REGISTRATION
DETAILS OF THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED
29.10.2020.
Exhibit P6A TRUE COPY OF THE TRADE LICENCE ISSUED BY
THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER
DATED 01.04.2022.
Exhibit P7A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION
CLARIFYING THE PROPERTY TAX BASED ON THE
PLINTH AREA DATED 10.04.2023.
Exhibit P8A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT FOR BUILDING
NUMBER 211/A ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
DATED 07.10.2023.
Exhibit P9A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT FOR THE
BUILDING 11/694 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 18.05.2023.
Exhibit P10A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT FOR THE
BUILDING 11/695 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 18.05.2023.
Exhibit P11A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT FOR THE
BUILDING 11/696 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 18.05.2023.
Exhibit P12A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED

¶34

WP(C) NO. 3448 OF 2024 6

¶35

BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED NIL.

¶36

`Exhibit`	`P13`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `BY THE MANAGING PAR` `TO THE 1ST RESPONDEN`	`REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED` `TNER OF THE 3RD PETITIONER` `T DATED NIL.`
`Exhibit`	`P13(a)`	`English translation`	`of exhibit P13.`
`Exhibit`	`P6(a)`	`English translation`	`of exhibit P6.`
`Exhibit`	`P7(a)`	`English translation`	`of exhibit P7.`
`Exhibit`	`P8(a)`	`English translation`	`of exhibit P8.`
`Exhibit`	`P12(a)`	`English translation`	`of exhibit P12.`
`RESPOND`	`ENTS EXHIBITS`
`Exhibit`	`R4(a)`	`A true copy of the` `G.O. (P) No. 17/2011`	`Governement Order bearing` `/LSGD dated 14/01/2011.`
`Exhibit`	`R4(b)`	`A true copy of the` `G.O. (P) No. 19/2011`	`Governement Order bearing` `/LSGD dated 14/01/2011.`
`Exhibit`	`R4(c)`	`A true copy of the` `G.O. (MS) No. 77/202`	`Governement Order bearing` `3/LSGD dated 22/03/2023.`
`Exhibit`	`R4(d)`	`A true copy of the` `G.O. (P) No. 25/2023`	`Governement Order bearing` `/LSGD dated 05/04/2023.`

M/S. Panazan Enterprises (P) Ltd., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Panazan Enterprises (P) Ltd., v. State of Kerala

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

M/S. M.C. Eldho & Company, Vs the State Tax Officer

Lekha G P Vs the Manager, Life Insurance Corporation, Kalpatta

Subrahmanian Vs the District Collector

Kitex Garments Ltd, Vs Union of India

Kitex Childrenswear Ltd., Vs Union of India

South Indian Assemblies of God (Malayalam District Council), Vs State of Kerala