{"id":234431,"date":"2009-10-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009"},"modified":"2018-01-28T15:45:04","modified_gmt":"2018-01-28T10:15:04","slug":"ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"M\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
M\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 27189 of 2009(P)\n\n\n1. M\/S DLF HOME DEVELOPERS LTD.,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,\n\n3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (WORKS CONTRACT),\n\n4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS),\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.SHAJI THOMAS PORKKATTIL\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM\n\n Dated :21\/10\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                       C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J.\n                   -------------------------------\n                   WP(C).NO. 27189 of 2009\n                  ---------------------------------\n         Dated this the 21st      day of October , 2009\n\n                           JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
            Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P18<\/p>\n
interlocutory order of the 4th respondent, passed on a stay<\/p>\n
petition filed along with Ext.P17 appeal, in which Ext.P16<\/p>\n
assessment for the year 2007-08 issued under the Kerala Value<\/p>\n
Added Tax Act 2003 (KVAT Act) is under challenge.        Petitioner<\/p>\n
who is a registered dealer under KVAT Act is engaged in<\/p>\n
developing land, constructing apartments and selling fully<\/p>\n
constructed apartments to individual buyers. It is submitted that<\/p>\n
all the construction activities undertaken by the petitioner is<\/p>\n
being done through contractors registered under KVAT Act and<\/p>\n
materials required for such construction is supplied free of cost to<\/p>\n
such contractors.   No consideration has been attached to the<\/p>\n
materials thus entrusted, on the basis of proper documentation,<\/p>\n
and therefore the title and ownership of such materials remains<\/p>\n
with the petitioner company itself. Further the contract amount<\/p>\n
does not include value of such materials entrusted. Therefore<\/p>\n
WP(C).27189\/09              2<\/span><\/p>\n
there is no sales with respect to such materials and hence the<\/p>\n
transaction will not attract liability of tax under the KVAT Act, is<\/p>\n
the contention.     Further contention is that they are selling fully<\/p>\n
completed apartments as immovable property to the customers<\/p>\n
on execution of Sale Deeds on payment of stamp duty on the<\/p>\n
entire value of title.\n<\/p>\n
      2. But the third respondent issued proposal and confirmed<\/p>\n
assessment rejecting returns filed on the ground that turn over<\/p>\n
relating to the transaction between the petitioner and the<\/p>\n
contractors are liable to be taxed, treating the same as ‘works<\/p>\n
contract’. Relying on the definitions of ‘dealer’ under section (2)<\/p>\n
(xv) and ‘works contract’ under section 2 (xliii)of the KVAT Act,<\/p>\n
the third respondent held that any agreement for carrying out<\/p>\n
building or construction activity for cash or deferred payment or<\/p>\n
valuable consideration, will come within the purview of ‘works<\/p>\n
contract’ and therefore the petitioner company is carrying out<\/p>\n
‘works contract’ and will be liable to pay tax on transfer of<\/p>\n
property in goods involved in such works contract. Further it is<\/p>\n
alleged that the petitioner company is undertaking to build as<\/p>\n
developers    for    the   prospective     purchasers,  and    such<\/p>\n
WP(C).27189\/09              3<\/span><\/p>\n
construction\/development is to be on payment of price in various<\/p>\n
instalments set out in the agreement.       Hence the transaction<\/p>\n
amounts to ‘works contract’ within the meaning of the term<\/p>\n
defined under the Act,      especially because the agreement is<\/p>\n
entered into before the construction is completed. Accordingly it<\/p>\n
is held that the petitioner company is liable to pay tax on the<\/p>\n
turn over after deducting eligible deductions stipulated under the<\/p>\n
KVAT Rules from the receipt of prospective buyers.           Third<\/p>\n
respondent held that the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court<\/p>\n
in K.Raheja        Development Corporation vs. State of<\/p>\n
Karnataka<\/a> (2005 141 STC 298(SC) is squarely applicable in<\/p>\n
the case of the petitioner. Therefore, on rejecting the turn over<\/p>\n
conceded, estimation was made treating the turn over pertaining<\/p>\n
to the supply of materials used for the construction as taxable.<\/p>\n
       3. According to the petitioner, they have filed application<\/p>\n
under section 94 of the KVAT Act before the 2nd respondent<\/p>\n
seeking clarification as to whether they are making any sale while<\/p>\n
supplying    materials free of cost to its contractors and as to<\/p>\n
whether petitioner is liable to pay tax under the KVAT Act with<\/p>\n
respect to such transactions. In Ext.P7 order the 2nd respondent<\/p>\n
WP(C).27189\/09             4<\/span><\/p>\n
held that the entire transaction of the petitioner has to be taken<\/p>\n
into account for deciding the issue and since the petitioner is<\/p>\n
accepting advance from prospective buyers before completion of<\/p>\n
the construction, the transaction will amount to a works contract<\/p>\n
as between the buyers and the developer. But it is clarified that<\/p>\n
the free supply of materials to the contractors, is not taxable,<\/p>\n
since it does not acquire the quality of contractors materials.<\/p>\n
The order further clarified that, since the petitioner is stepping<\/p>\n
into the shoes of the contractor with regard to the prospective<\/p>\n
buyers such materials are taxable on its transfer value. It is<\/p>\n
submitted that, against Ext.P7 order the petitioner had already<\/p>\n
filed appeal before this court and it stands admitted and pending<\/p>\n
disposal.\n<\/p>\n
      4. Contention of the petitioner is that K.Raheja’s case is<\/p>\n
not at all applicable    with respect to the transaction of the<\/p>\n
petitioner since they are selling completely constructed flats and<\/p>\n
that they are not entering into any agreement for construction<\/p>\n
with the prospective buyers. Further it is pointed out that the<\/p>\n
Hon’ble Apex Court had doubted correctness of the judgment in<\/p>\n
Raheja’s case and referred the matter to a larger Bench as per<\/p>\n
WP(C).27189\/09             5<\/span><\/p>\n
the decision reported in      Larsen & Tourbo Limited and<\/p>\n
another vs. State of Karnataka reported in (2008) 17 VST<\/p>\n
460(SC).\n<\/p>\n
   5. While considering the stay petition by the 4th respondent,<\/p>\n
the petitioner had raised all the above contentions. The matter<\/p>\n
was dealt with elaborately by the 4th respondent in Ext.P18 order.<\/p>\n
But after adverting to the various contentions the appellate<\/p>\n
authority   observed   that   the   clarification issued   by  the<\/p>\n
Commissioner of Commercial Taxes now stands valid, since this<\/p>\n
court has not granted any stay in the appeal filed against the said<\/p>\n
order. It is further observed that the matter involved is only a<\/p>\n
pure question of law and the Hon’ble Supreme Court has only<\/p>\n
doubted correctness of Raheja’s case. Therefore the appellate<\/p>\n
authority observed that eventhough the appellant had established<\/p>\n
a prima facie case, it cannot be accepted as a case in which<\/p>\n
absolute stay can be granted. Hence payment of 50% of the tax<\/p>\n
amount in dispute is insisted as a condition for granting stay.<\/p>\n
       6.     Going by the impugned order it is noticed that<\/p>\n
eventhough contention of the appellant has been discussed in<\/p>\n
detail, the 4th respondent has not gone into merits of such<\/p>\n
WP(C).27189\/09              6<\/span><\/p>\n
contentions. On the other hand emphasis is given only to the<\/p>\n
clarification issued by the Commissioner and to the decision in<\/p>\n
Raheja’s case.     But it is the specific case of the petitioner<\/p>\n
company that Reheja’s case is not applicable since they are not<\/p>\n
entering into any agreement for sale of the flat prior to the<\/p>\n
execution of the sale deed.       It is also contended that even<\/p>\n
assuming Raheja’s case is applicable, the question involved<\/p>\n
therein    has   not  attained  finality, having   been  pending<\/p>\n
consideration in a larger Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court. The<\/p>\n
authority also has not considered the contention that while<\/p>\n
issuing clarification under section 94 of the KVAT Act the<\/p>\n
Commissioner of Commercial Taxes has exceeded beyond the<\/p>\n
issue on which clarification was sought for, and the findings<\/p>\n
entered therein with respect to the nature of the transaction of<\/p>\n
the petitioner is without any basis, and that appeal is pending<\/p>\n
against such decision.     Proper application of the mind to the<\/p>\n
above said contentions is lacking, as reflected from Ext.P18<\/p>\n
order.    Under the above mentioned circumstances, I am of the<\/p>\n
opinion that condition for payment of 50% of the tax amount is<\/p>\n
insisted in a quite mechanical manner.        Such imposition of<\/p>\n
WP(C).27189\/09                7<\/span><\/p>\n
condition in a mechanical manner is abdicated through various<\/p>\n
decisions of this court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Hence the<\/p>\n
matter requires consideration for modification of the condition.    After<\/p>\n
adverting to the various contentions, I am of the opinion that there is<\/p>\n
a strong prima facie case established by the appellant. But the matter<\/p>\n
need elaborate consideration while disposing of the appeal. In the<\/p>\n
circumstances to meet the ends of justice a lessor onerous condition<\/p>\n
can be imposed while granting stay, till the disposal of the appeal.<\/p>\n
       7. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of quashing Ext.P18,<\/p>\n
and directing the 4th respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P17<\/p>\n
appeal after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early<\/p>\n
as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of<\/p>\n
receipt of a copy of this judgment. Respondents are directed to keep<\/p>\n
in abeyance realisation of the amounts covered under Ext.P16<\/p>\n
assessment pertaining to the year 2007-08, on condition of the<\/p>\n
petitioner making payment of an amount of Rs.5 lakhs within a period<\/p>\n
of three weeks from today and on condition of furnishing security<\/p>\n
bond for the balance amount.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                          C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE\npmn\/\n\nWP(C).27189\/09    8\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court M\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 27189 of 2009(P) 1. M\/S DLF HOME DEVELOPERS LTD., … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE … Respondent 2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (WORKS […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-234431","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-28T10:15:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-28T10:15:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1381,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-28T10:15:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-28T10:15:04+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-28T10:15:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009"},"wordCount":1381,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009","name":"M\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-28T10:15:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-dlf-home-developers-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S Dlf Home Developers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/234431","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=234431"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/234431\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=234431"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=234431"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=234431"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}