Pending title disputes do not prevent municipalities from accepting property tax payments, ensuring rights can be allocated post-suit.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 11th day of June 2020 The intervention of this Court on behalf of the petitioner for issuance of an innocuous prayer to the respondent is to accept the provisional building tax in respect of building bearing No.17/946-A and 17/946-B of Kattappana Municipality. In support of the aforementioned prayer it is submitted that the building tax in respect of the aforementioned building had been remitted by the petitioner for the last so many years but, the 3rd respondent a co-owner had raised the objections. It is in these circumstances the petitioner had to make a representation and file the present writ petition. Even on a prior occasion petitioner had preferred a writ petition against the Municipality restraining them from not changing the ownership since the matter was pending in the Civil Court.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that even if the dispute ie., the title suit is pending amongst the co-owners, the respondents cannot refuse to accept the building tax as it can be always appropriated amongst the co-

owners as and when the title suit is decided which cannot even come in the way of respondents for acceptance of property tax. A detailed representation Ext.P3 dated 21.05.2020 has been submitted but, no action has been taken.

3. Issue notice before admission. Sri.Liji.J.Vadakkedom accepts notice on behalf of respondents Nos.1 and 2 the contesting respondents. Respondent No.3 is also asserting the right of the property being a owner in the pending title suit. Sri.Liji.J.Vadakkedom informs the court that the request of the petitioner to deposit property tax has not been accepted in view of the pendency of the objection by respondent No.3 but, the department would not be averse in accepting the property tax giving liberty to the parties to appropriate the amount as and when the decision in the title suit is rendered.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised paper book, I am of the view that the pendency of the civil suit with regard to the title cannot prevent the Municipality to accept the property tax on behalf of one of the co-owner. It would be always subject to the outcome of the pending suit and without prejudice of the rights. Payment of tax and dues can always be appropriated amongst the co-owners or parties to the suit in a title. My observation is a co-owner would not be construed as conferring the right upon the parties to the lis in the pending suit. The petitioner had already submitted a request for acceptance of building tax. I am of the view that respondents should accept the tax as provisional subject to the decision of the pending suit. This would protect the right and interest of the 3rd respondent an objector. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of by issuing direction to the respondent to accept the property tax provisionally. There is no necessity of issuing notice to the 3rd respondent as it would defray the cost of the litigation.

Sd/-

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE

nak

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED ON

9.4.2019.

EXHIBIT P2 JUDGEMENT OF WPC NO.32204/2019 DATED ON

28.11.2019.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED ON

21.5.2020.