High Court Kerala High Court

P.M.Yusaf vs The Intelligence Officer (Ib) on 10 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
P.M.Yusaf vs The Intelligence Officer (Ib) on 10 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 7770 of 2010(U)


1. P.M.YUSAF, PROPRIETOR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB)
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,

4. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :10/03/2010

 O R D E R
                    P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
              ..............................................................................
                        W.P.(C) No. 7770 OF 2010
               .........................................................................
                       Dated this the 10th March, 2010



                                    J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is aggrieved of Ext. P11 revenue recovery

notice issue by the third respondent without any regard to the

pendency of Ext.P9 Second Appeal accompanied by Ext. P10

petition for stay which are stated as pending consideration before

the second respondent. The petitioner is also aggrieved of non

finalisation of Ext. P6 appeal which is also pending consideration

before the second respondent in respect of another cause of

action .

2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who

submits that the recovery proceedings now being pursued against

the petitioner are only in respect of the cause of action projected

in Ext. P9 appeal and it is not in any way connected with the

issue pending consideration in Ext. P6 appeal.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the

W.P.(C) No. 7770 OF 2010

2

second respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate

orders on Ext.P10 petition for stay preferred by the petitioner in

connection with Ext. P9 appeal, in accordance with law, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one

month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. It is

made clear that till such appropriate orders are passed on Ext.

P10 petition for stay, all further proceedings pursuant to Ext. P11

shall be kept in abeyance.

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.

lk