IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 34155 of 2007(N)
1. M.K.KHADEEJA UMMA,
... Petitioner
2. PARVEZ CHUNDANGA,
3. ABDUL MAJEED, FLAT NO.I-D, -DO- -DO-
4. RAJENDRA KUMAR, FLAT NO.2A, -DO- -DO-
5. JYOTHI MALLERI, FLAT NO.2B, -DO- -DO-
6. AMRUTH A.C., FLAT NO.2D, -DO- -DO-
7. M.K.MARIYU, FLAT NO.3A, -DO- -DO-
8. DR.SYYED HASHIM, FLAT NO.3D, -DO- -DO-
9. PARAKKANDY GIREESHKUMAR,
10. DR.RAVEENDRA MOHAN, FLAT NO.4A, -DO- -DO
11. PRASANTH C.V., FLAT NO.4B, -DO- -DO-
12. SUNILKUMAR, FLAT NO.4D, -DO- -DO-
13. NIRMALA MOORKOTHY, FLAT NO.5A,
14. RADHAKRISHNAN, FLAT NO.5B, -DO- -DO-
15. DR.SREEKUMAR, FLAT NO.6B, -DO- -DO-
Vs
1. THE THAHSILDAR,
... Respondent
2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :01/12/2007
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J
-------------------
W.P.(C).34155/2007
--------------------
Dated this the 1st day of December, 2007
JUDGMENT
Assessment orders under the Building Tax Act
is under challenge. Exts.P2 to P16 are the assessment
orders. Referring to the Statement filed, the learned
Government Pleader submits that though there are 22
apartments, during the course of the enquiry held with
notice to the parties, nothing was made available to the
Assessing Officer to indicate that in respect of each of
these apartments, the owners had made individual
contribution for meeting the cost of construction of these
apartments. It was also stated that the documents having
title to the flats were executed as late as in August and
September, 2006, and that flats are still in the name of
the first petitioner who had constructed the flats. In the
light of this, prima-facie, I do not find any reason to
interfere in this writ petition.
2. I also notice that the petitioners have not availed of
the statutory remedies where he can produce documents
W.P.(C).34155/2007
2
and prove their contentions, correctness of which is to be
decided based on the evidence that is to be produced.
3. In view of above, this writ petition is closed without
prejudice to the right of the petitioner to pursue the
matter before the statutory authority and leaving open
the contentions that are raised.
ANTONY DOMINIC
Judge
mrcs