The Rubber Board vs State Of Kerala on 15 December, 2006

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP No. 27903 of 2002(V)


1. THE RUBBER BOARD, MUTTAMBALAM, KOTTAYAM,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM.

3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KOTTAYAM.

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

 Dated :15/12/2006

 O R D E R
                            KURIAN JOSEPH, J.

                           ----------------------------

                          O.P.No.27903 OF 2002

                           -----------------------------

            Dated this the 15th day of December, 2006


                               J U D G M E N T

The claim for exemption from payment of building tax is

covered against the petitioner by the decision of this court

reported in Hindustan Organic Chemicals v. State of Kerala

[1999(1)KLT 782] wherein it has been held that building owned by

a Government company cannot be treated as a building owned by

Government of India. Yet another contention is that the building

is liable to be exempted under the provisions of Section 3(2)

Kerala Building Tax Act. The use being not principally charitable,

the same is not entitled to exemption. The 3rd contention of the

petitioner is that the assessment in any case should be with

reference to the date of completion of the building. That is a

matter to be considered by the assessing authority, since the

petitioner is entitled to have the assessment as per the schedule

of the rates prevailing on the date of completion of the building.

In case the Petitioner has any dispute on the assessment, it will

be open to the petitioner to point out the same before the 3rd

respondent, in which case on that aspect, the 3rd respondent will

O.P.No.27903/2002 :2:

duly consider the matter and take appropriate action with notice

to the petitioner within two months. In order to enable the

petitioner to workout the relief as above, the interim order passed

by this court in C.M.P.No.47503/2002 will continue for another

four months.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE)

ps

O.P.No.27903/2002 :3:

KURIAN JOSEPH, J.

O.P.No.27903/2002

JUDGMENT

15th December, 2006