ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed challenging a resolution passed by the respondent/Municipality and to direct the Municipality to collect the correct property tax from the petitioners as per law.

2. According to the petitioners, they are residents of the respondent/

Municipality and the Minicipality had attempted to enhance the property tax illegally by way of an impugned resolution. Hence, they have filed the present writ petition.

3. The contentions of the petitioners are as follows:

(i) A general revision of property tax was introduced in the second half of 1987-88, thereby enhancing the property tax manifold. The said revision was effected contrary to Tamil Nadu Act 35 of 1990, under which amendments were brought in the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act.

(ii) The petitioners have further contended that challenging the said illegal revision of property tax, they had filed O.S.No.48 of 1992 on the file of District Munsif Court, Sengottai for a declaration that the revision effected in the second half of 1987-88 is in violation of Tamil Nadu Act 35 of 1990 and based upon the same, the respondent/Municipality is not entitled to recover additional property tax from the plaintiffs. Apart from that, the plaintiffs have prayed that the defendant/Municipality should be directed to refund the illegally collected additional taxes from the second half year of 1987-88 along with 12% interest. The said suit was decreed as prayed for on 30.06.1993. The Sengottai Municipality filed A.S.No.76 of 1993 and A.S.No. 61 of 1996 before Sub Court, Tenkasi. The learned Sub Judge was pleased to confirm the judgment and decree of the trial Court.

(iii) The petitioners have further contended that in violation of the Civil Court decree, the respondent/Municipality had issued a demand notice. Hence, E.P.No.3 of 2004 was filed by the plaintiffs under Order 21 Rule 32 of Code of Civil Procedure. In the said execution proceedings, E.A.No.91 of 2004 was filed for production of certain documents. The said request was rejected by the Execution Court. Hence, a revision in C.R.P(MD)No.312 of

2005 was filed before this Court.

(iv) While the said revision was pending, the respondent/Municipality passed Resolution No.123, dated 31.05.2007. Since the said resolution was in favour of the revision petitioners/writ petitioners herein, recording the same, the revision petition was closed.

(v) However, on 26.12.2012, in Resolution No.302, the respondent/Municipality had recalled Resolution No.123 and proceeded to revise taxes from the second half of 1993-94 based upon the general revision directed by the State Government. This resolution is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(vi) The learned counsel for the petitioners had contended that under Tamil Nadu Act 35 of 1990, Rule 9-A was introduced in schedule IV, which governs the taxation and finance rules under the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, where there is an enhancement in the assessment of tax payable for the half year commencing from first October 1987 is concerned, if the buildings are constructed after first April 1982, but before first October 1987, the property tax shall not exceed 50% of the property tax payable immediately before the first October 1987. In case, if the buildings are used for residential purposes, the thatched building were completely exempted from any enhancement. As far as other type of buildings are concerned, the property tax shall not exceed 100% of the property tax payable immediately before the first October 1987, if the building is wholly or partly occupied by the owners. However, in case of leased out premises, the enhancement of property tax shall not exceed 200% of the property tax payable immediately before the first of October 1987. In case of non-residential buildings, the enhancement of property tax shall not exceed 300% of the property tax payable immediately before first of October 1987.