8.This Court is of an opinion that in respect of certain factual disputes raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the age of the building, nature of the business, location, in which, the property is situated, are all cannot be considered by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Such disputed facts and circumstances are to be adjudicated by producing the original documents and by adducing evidences before the competent forum. Under the provisions of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, the appeal lies before the Commissioner at the first instance. Against the order of the Commissioner, the writ petitioner is entitled to approach the Taxation Appellate Tribunal and thereafter, to the Municipal Tax cases, the Principal District Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. Thus, a three tier appeal provisions are provided under the Act. All such disputed facts and circumstances are to be adjudicated before the Appellate authorities under the provisions of the Act. However, the present writ petition has been filed in the year 2006 and the final hearing of the writ petition is taken by this Court after a lapse of 12 years from the date of filing. This itself shows that the litigants are delaying or postponing the payment of property tax in one way or other and at this point of time, this Court cannot encourage such attitudes. Disputing the property tax in the manner known to law is one aspect of the matter and in respect of filing the present writ petition and evading the payment of tax is another aspect. In order to adopt a balancing approach, the writ petitioner shall be directed to pay the arrears of property tax to be paid to Chennai Corporation and if the petitioner is still
