SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(Ker) 3

PAREED PILLAY
Sankara Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Chandran – Respondent


Judgment :-

Revision petitioner challenges the order of the Munsiff, Alathur in O.S.No.132 of 1987. Plaintiff filed the suit claiming damages on the ground that the defendant did not act in good faith when he assessed the Building Tax.

2. In the written statement defendant contended inter-alia that he is entitled to the benefits under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985. The Munsiff rejected the said contention.

3. Plaintiff filed the suit to realise Rs.3,000/- as damages on the allegation -that the defendant out of spite towards him and misusing his official capacity and without bonafides and quite arbitrarily assessed the building tax without any rhyme or reason. The Tahsildar had sent a notice to the plaintiff on 18-11-1985 under S.7(1) of the Kerala Building Tax Act calling upon him to file the return. Case of the plaintiff is that though he submitted the return, defendant without considering the relevant documents and without complying with the provisions in the Act assessed the value of the building at Rs.1,70,056/- and determined the taxasRs.2,101.70. Plaintiff challenged the order before the appellate authority successfully.

4. The only question that arises for consideration is























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top