IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.M.MANOJ, J
S.A.WAHAB, AGED 81 YEARS, S/O.SHEIK YOUSEF SHAHIB, MANAGING PARTNER, MEHABOOB THEATER COMPLEX, K.P.R.RAO ROAD, KASARAGOD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT (RD),GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 30952 OF 2017 | WP(C) NO. 12222 OF 2025 | WP(C) NO. 16280 OF 2023 | WP(C) NO. 5991 OF 2018 | WP(C) NO. 12035 OF 2018 | WP(C) NO. 14206 OF 2018
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to tax demands based on legal compliance. (Para 1) |
| 2. dispute over compliance with tax procedures. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's directive for reassessment by the municipality. (Para 5) |
| 4. disposition of writ petitions with directives. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
All these writ petitions have been filed challenging the demand notices issued to them by the Kasaragod Municipality with respect to arrears of property tax assessed in respect of their properties. The petitioners contend that the demands are illegal, as they are not in compliance with Rule 4(4) of the Kerala Municipality (Property Tax, Service Cess and Surcharge) Rules, 2011. It was also argued that by virtue of the provisions of Section 539 of the Kerala Municipality Act , there could not have been a demand of property tax beyond the period of three years from the date on which the property tax fell due.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality, disputing the contentions raised in the writ petitions.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in these writ petitions is covered by the reported decision in Thrissur Corporation v. Sangeetha Hotels [2025 (4) KLT 274] .
4. The learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality has submitted that, in all the impugned demands, Rule 4(4) has been complied with. Further it is contended that the period of limitation prescribed under Section 539 of the Municipality Act has not been adhered to. This aspect requires reconsideration.
5. Having considered the decision cited supra, I deem it appropriate to set aside all the impugned demands and direct the Municipality to reconsider the matter in the light of the aforesaid judgment.
6. The Municipality shall ensure that the procedure of publication of the final rates is done expeditiously and demand notices served on the assessees concerned only after completing an assessment thereafter. The demands issued in respect of the re-determined property tax shall be confined to a prior period of three years from the date of service of the fresh demand notices, as directed in the decision referred to above.
With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed of.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.