i.Saheed Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Pathanamthitta

i.Saheed vs Commercial Tax Officer, Pathanamthitta

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Sep 02, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1087234

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1087234
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh
Decided On: Sep 02, 2013
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

i.Saheed

Respondent

Commercial Tax Officer, Pathanamthitta

Excerpt

.....the 3rd respondent dated 05-07-2013 ext.p4 copy of order issued by the 3rd respondent dated 14-08-2013 ext.p5 copy of letter filed by the petitioner before the 1st respondent 18-04-2013 respondent(s)' exhibits:nil --------------------------- //true copy// p.a to judge v.chitambaresh,j.= = = = = = = = = = = w.p.(c) no.21665 of 2013 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = dated this the 2nd day of september, 2013 judgment the petitioner challenges ext.p4 conditional order of stay passed on ext.p3 petition for stay accompanying ext.p2 appeal filed against ext.p1 order imposing penalty. ext.p4 order inter ali directs the petitioner to pay 50% of the amount imposed as penalty and to furnish adequate security for the balance amount to the satisfaction of the assessing authority as a condition for grant of stay of recovery of the amounts.2. a detailed consideration of the merits of this case at this juncture would prejudicially affect the contentions of either parties in ext.p2 statutory appeal pending before the third respondent. i feel that ext.p4 order can be modified by directing the petitioner to remit one third of the amount imposed as penalty and to furnish adequate security for the balance amount to the satisfaction of the assessing authority within a period of three weeks from today. w.p.(c) no.21665 o”2. 3. the petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition with the judgment before the third respondent for compliance. the writ petition is disposed of. v.chitambaresh judge smm

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013/11TH BHADRA, 1935 WP(C).No. 21665 of 2013 (G) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------- I.SAHEED M/S.MALABAR LEATHER PALACE SHOPPING CENTRE BEN COMPLEX, T.K ROAD, PATHANAMTHITTA BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.MAHESH V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA PATHANAMTHITT”

645. 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.1, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES KOTTAYA”

001. 3. DY.COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)-II DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLA”

001. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SOBHA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-09-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MNS WP(C).No. 21665 of 2013 (G) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: ------------------------- EXT.P1 COPY OF

ORDER

ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 30-05-2013 EXT.P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 05-07-2013 EXT.P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 05-07-2013 EXT.P4 COPY OF

ORDER

ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14-08-2013 EXT.P5 COPY OF LETTER FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT 18-04-2013 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:NIL --------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE V.CHITAMBARESH,J.

= = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.21665 of 2013 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2013

JUDGMENT

The petitioner challenges Ext.P4 conditional order of stay passed on Ext.P3 petition for stay accompanying Ext.P2 appeal filed against Ext.P1 order imposing penalty. Ext.P4 order inter ali directs the petitioner to pay 50% of the amount imposed as penalty and to furnish adequate security for the balance amount to the satisfaction of the assessing authority as a condition for grant of stay of recovery of the amounts.

2. A detailed consideration of the merits of this case at this juncture would prejudicially affect the contentions of either parties in Ext.P2 statutory appeal pending before the third respondent. I feel that Ext.P4 order can be modified by directing the petitioner to remit one third of the amount imposed as penalty and to furnish adequate security for the balance amount to the satisfaction of the assessing authority within a period of three weeks from today. W.P.(C) No.21665 o”

2. 3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition with the judgment before the third respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of. V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE smm

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2013 Same Parties i.Saheed vs Commercial Tax Officer, Pathanamthitta Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh