IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 1136 of 2010()
1. ASOKAN VASU,AGED 55 YEARS,S/O.VASU,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS),
... Respondent
2. THE COMMERCIAL TAXE OFFICER,VAT CIRCLE,
3. DHANALEKSHMI BANK LTD,KALLAMBALAM BRANCH
4. CORPORATION BANK,KALLAMBALAM-695605.
For Petitioner :SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.J.CHELAMESWAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :10/08/2010
O R D E R
J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.N.Ravindran, J.
------------------------------------------
W.A. No.1136 of 2010
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of August, 2010
JUDGMENT
J.Chelameswar, C.J.
Aggrieved by a judgment dated 14th June, 2010 in W.P.
(C) No.18438 of 2010 the partially successful petitioner preferred
the instant writ appeal.
2. The appellant is a holder of FL-3 licence under the
provisions of the Kerala Abkari Act read with the Foreign Liquor
Rules,1972. The said licence authorises the holder of such a licence
to serve liquor at the hotel run by the appellant. The liquor which is
to be sold in such an establishment, it appears, is purchased by the
appellant from the Kerala State Beverages (M&M) Corporation
Limited.
3. Under sub-rule (5) of Rule 35 of the Rules of the High
Court of Kerala, 1971 read with Rule 159 of the said Rules, a
memorandum of appeal would require to contain a synopsis
W.A.No.1136 of 2010
– 2 –
containing the “dates and events chronologically arranged, points to be
urged, Acts/Rules to be referred and authorities to be cited”. Rule 35
of the Rules of the High Court of Kerala reads as follows:
“35. Form of Proceedings.– (1) All petitions,
Affidavits, Memoranda of appeal and other proceedings
presented to the court shall be typewritten or printed on one
side, fairly and legibly, on stamp paper or on white foolscap
folio paper, with an outer margin of about 4 c.m. and an
inner margin of about 1.5 cm. Numbers shall be expressed
in figures.
(2) All main proceedings such as Writ Petitions, Writ
Appeals, Contempt Petitions, Civil and Criminal Appeal
Memoranda, Revision Petitions, etc., shall be presented to
the Court with thick covering sheets of thick durable paper
bearing protected holes at the top and bottom left hand
corner one inch apart from the outer edges, placed at the top
and bottom.
(3) All proceedings shall be presented in book form
without folding, neatly stitched in one bunch on the left
margin and the pages therein shall be consecutively
numbered. In the main proceedings, the thick covering
sheets at the top and bottom shall be left unstitched and
shall be tied together with other papers by passing
removable tags through the holes at the top and bottom left
W.A.No.1136 of 2010
– 3 –
hand corners. The entire case file proceedings shall further
be tied across using white tape.
(4) All main proceedings shall contain an index sheet
placed immediately below the covering sheet, setting forth
the brief description of the contents therein with reference
to the respective page numbers. One blank sheet shall be
placed below the index sheet for making further entries.
(5) A synopsis containing the dates and events
chronologically arranged, points to be urged, Acts/Rules to
be referred and authorities to be cited shall be filed along
with all main proceedings and shall be placed below the
blank sheet.
(6) Miscellaneous petitions filed along with main
proceedings shall be placed immediately before the
covering sheet at the bottom of the main proceedings and
shall be flagged noting “I.A.No….”
(7) Miscellaneous petitions and pleadings filed in
pending cases shall be flagged noting thereon “IA
No….”/brief description of pleading such as “Counter by
R……. Reply by R………/Statement by …………”etc.”
4. Memorandum of the instant writ appeal does not contain
any information whatsoever as to what are the basic facts which
provided the cause of action for the writ petition. The pleadings are
wholly unsatisfactory. Obviously the learned counsel for the appellant
W.A.No.1136 of 2010
– 4 –
believes that it is the responsibility of the Judges to wade through all
the papers filed to make out a case and decide very ‘wisely’ in favour
of the appellant. We are afraid that the law is otherwise. We have
already noticed the relevant provision governing the pleadings in this
Court.
5. Unfortunately, the memorandum of grounds does not
disclose the period for which the appellant’s tax liability was
determined except a bald statement at paragraph 2 that “However a
best judgment assessment was made by the 2nd respondent determining
a total tax liability at Rs.33,97,779/-“. Confronted with the question,
the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the details are
contained in the writ petition and he is of the opinion that since what is
questioned is a garnishee order passed against the appellant pursuant
to the assessment, the appellant need not disclose the further details of
the assessment. We are afraid that such an understanding of the nature
of the pleadings is wholly inconsistent with the law or the practice. In
the circumstances, we decline to exercise our jurisdiction under Article
W.A.No.1136 of 2010
– 5 –
226 of the Constitution of India.
The writ appeal is therefore dismissed at the admission
stage.
J.Chelameswar,
Chief Justice
P.N.Ravindran,
Judge
vns