K.E.Rahmath vs the Tahsildar,

K.E.Rahmath vs The Tahsildar,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Apr 01, 2022

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1443755

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/1443755
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Devan Ramachandran
Decided On: Apr 01, 2022
Case Number: WP(C)/1769/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

K.E.Rahmath

Respondent

The Tahsildar,

Excerpt

.....the same are pending before this court. he thus contended that unless the said appeals are disposed of, the petitioners cannot seek any relief, as has been prayed for herein.4. even when i hear the learned special governmentpleader as afore, the fact remains that mere pendency of an appeal before this court will not interdict the petitioners from remitting land tax on the properties, since it is only a fiscal measure and not an attribute of ownership per se.5. that said, since the state says that they have alreadyfiled appeals, i am certain that even if the petitioners are allowed to remit land tax, the records must contain an endorsement regarding the same. this is more so because, the learned special government pleader asserts that, consequent to exts.p7 and p8, petitioners have not been restored possession of lands in question. taking the totality of the afore circumstances, i order this writ petition, directing the 2nd respondent - village officer, to allow the petitioners to remit land tax on the properties involved in this case; however, with an endorsement made on the tax receipt and records about the pendency of the appeal/s against exts.p7 and p8. this shall be done within one week upon the petitioner furnishing the necessary amounts towards tax. i, however, clarify that this court has not considered if the petitioners are in possession of the properties or otherwise; and mere remittance of tax will not be construed to mean that they are so. this aspect is left open to be pursued appositely in the pending appeals. sd/- rr devan ramachandran judge appendix of wp(c) 1769/2022 petitioner exhibits exhibit p1 a true copy of the jenmam assignment deed no.1828/1995 dated 30.5.1995. exhibit p2 a true copy of the jenmam assignment deed no.1776/2002 dated 26.10.2002. exhibit p3 a true copy of the assignment deed no.1830 of 1995 dated 31.5.1995. exhibit p4 a true copy of the assignment deed no.2841 of 1996 dated 8.7.1996. exhibit p5 a true copy of the order in.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 1769 OF 2022 PETITIONERS: 1 K.E.RAHMATH, AGED 72 YEARS, W/O. LATE ABDUL GAFOOR, RESIDING AT RAJEENAZ HOUSE, NEW MAHE PO, KANNUR-673311. 2 K.E.NOUSHAD, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. LATE ABDUL GAFOOR, RESIDING AT RAJEENAZ HOUSE, NEW MAHE PO, KANNUR-673311.
BY ADVS. V.V.SURENDRAN P.A.HARISH ANUSREE.C RESPONDENTS: 1 THE TAHSILDAR, MANANTHAVADY TALUK, WAYANADU-670645. 2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PERIYA VILLAGE, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANADU-670645. 3 THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, NORTH WAYANAD DIVISION, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANADU-670645. BY ADVS. SHRI.T.P.SAJAN, SPL. G.P. (FOREST) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The petitioners say that the properties involved in this case have already been excluded from the purview of a notification issued by the competent Authority under the provisions of the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003, but that in spite of this, they are being interdicted from remitting Land Tax on it.

2. Sri.V.V.Surendran - learned counsel for the

petitioners, pleaded that his clients be allowed to remit Land Tax on the property in question, taking into account Exts.P7 and P8 orders of the competent Tribunal, without any avoidable delay.

3. In response, the learned Special Government Pleader

for Forests - Sri.T.P.Sajan, submitted that the State has already filed appeals against Exts.P7 and P8 and the same are pending before this Court. He thus contended that unless the said Appeals are disposed of, the petitioners cannot seek any relief, as has been prayed for herein.

4. Even when I hear the learned Special Government

Pleader as afore, the fact remains that mere pendency of an Appeal before this Court will not interdict the petitioners from remitting Land Tax on the properties, since it is only a fiscal measure and not an attribute of ownership per se.

5. That said, since the State says that they have already

filed Appeals, I am certain that even if the petitioners are allowed to remit Land Tax, the records must contain an endorsement regarding the same. This is more so because, the learned Special Government Pleader asserts that, consequent to Exts.P7 and P8, petitioners have not been restored possession of lands in question. Taking the totality of the afore circumstances, I order this Writ Petition, directing the 2nd respondent - Village Officer, to allow the petitioners to remit Land Tax on the properties involved in this case; however, with an endorsement made on the Tax Receipt and records about the pendency of the Appeal/s against Exts.P7 and P8. This shall be done within one week upon the petitioner furnishing the necessary amounts towards tax. I, however, clarify that this Court has not considered if the petitioners are in possession of the properties or otherwise; and mere remittance of tax will not be construed to mean that they are so. This aspect is left open to be pursued appositely in the pending appeals. Sd/- RR DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1769/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE JENMAM ASSIGNMENT DEED NO.1828/1995 DATED 30.5.1995. Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JENMAM ASSIGNMENT DEED NO.1776/2002 DATED 26.10.2002. Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT DEED NO.1830 OF 1995 DATED 31.5.1995. Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT DEED NO.2841 OF 1996 DATED 8.7.1996. Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.A.115/1977 OF THE FOREST TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE DATED 18.12.1979. Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN MFA HON'BLE COURT. Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN O.A.45/2003 AND O.A.46/2003 DATED 31.7.2017 BEFORE THE FOREST TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE. Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED

14.6.2012 IN OA 4/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR EFL CASES/1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, KOZHIKODE. Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 17.6.2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE PLANTATION TAX RECEIPT IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY DATED 22.6.2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties K.E.Rahmath vs The Tahsildar, Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Devan Ramachandran