Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 59493
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
Deepthi S. – Appellant
Versus
PRAKASH – Respondent
Con.Case(C)/1579/2022
K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN, Harikrishnan S
Compliance with a court order was verified, leading to the dismissal of the contempt petition.
Headnote:
Contempt - Disobedience to Court Order - Relevant Provisions Discussed - Legal basis for compliance with the order established; no contempt found.
Fact of the Case:
This contempt case arose from alleged non-compliance with an earlier court order dated 05.10.2021 regarding property tax payment assessments, leading to the petitioner filing a contempt petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondent complied with the order, as the property tax assessment remained stayed and the petitioner was liable only for the pre-revised tax rate, thus clearing the contempt claim.
Issues: Whether the respondent was in contempt of court for failure to follow the order regarding property tax payment assessments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded there was no contempt as the respondent demonstrated compliance with the order, affirming the legal basis for the tax assessment.
Final Decision: The contempt case is closed, with no further action required.
JUDGMENT
This contempt case was initiated alleging disobedience to the order of this Court dated 05.10.2021.
2. The 1st respondent in the contempt petition has filed an affidavit specifically stating that the "the apprehension expressed by the petitioner in Annexure R1(c),the petition is baseless................... It is quite natural that the Sanchaya online property tax portal will indicate Ext.P5 revised tax assessment along with arrears due from the year of retrospective demand namely FY 2018-19 onwards in half yearly tabulation. In the case at hand, since Ext.P5 assessment stand stayed until further orders. Petitioner would be legally bound to pay the pre-revised rate of tax, namely, Rs. 4,572/- only for the FY 2022-23 subject of course to the final orders to be passed in WPC. …........ Hence, the doubt raised in Annexure R1(c) has no legal basis. This respondent bona fide submit that the petitioner has paid the property tax from FY 2018-19 till 2021-22 at the pre-prevised rate of Rs. 4,572/- and that respondents are now due for payment of Rs.4,572 as property tax for FY- 2022-23, subject to further orders in the pending case.”
3. In view of the above affirmation, I find no reason to proceed with this contempt case as it is clear that the order is being complied with. In case the order is not complied with, the petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court again in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the contempt case is closed.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1579/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 THE TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED
05.10.2021 IN WPC NO.21124/2021 Annexure 2 THE TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 10.11.2021 Annexure3 THE TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ADDRESSED TO FIRST RESPONDENT HERE IN DATED 26.07.2022 Annexure4 THE TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 25.07.2022 RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R1(b) True copy of postal receipt dt.1.10.2022 issued by Post Office, Chengannur Annexure R1(a) True copy of notice no. R1-3018/21 dt.29.9.2022 issued by present secretary of municipality to petitioner Annexure R1(c) True copy of representation dt.6.10.2022 submitted by petitioner before Municipal Secretary, Chengannur along with copy of Sanchaya online property tax demand PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 5 The true copy of Receipt No.73990 dated
27.07.2018 issued by the Chengannur Municipality .
Annexure 6 The true copy ofTax Receipt No.90606 dated 05.05.2020 Annexure 7 The true copy of Printout taken from the online portal of Chengannur muncipality inrespect of petitioners building.
Annexure 8 The true copy of Statement taken from the Portal of Municipality inrespect of building in question.
