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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 93242

Honourable Mr Justice G. CHANDRASEKHARAN
BELUKURICHI KONGU COMMUNITY WERLFARE TRUST – Appellant
Versus
THE SPECIAL OFFICER – Respondent
SA/1016/2021



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12.01.2022

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN

S.A.No.1016 of 2021

Belukurichi Kongu Community Welfare Trust,

Represented by its President, Mr.Arulprakasam,

Son of Rathnasababhathi,

4/95 Senthamangalam Taluk,

Namakkal District.

...Appellant/Appellant/Plaintiff

Vs.

The Special Officer,

Belukurichi Panchayat,

Belukurichi,

Senthamangalam Taluk,

Namakkal District.

...Respondent/Respondent/Defendant

PRAYER: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Code of

Civil Procedure, to allow the above second appeal by setting

aside the judgement and decree dated 27.01.2021 made in A.S.No.

08 of 2017 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Court,

Namakkal, confirming the Judgement and decree dated 28.09.2016

made in O.S.No. 68 of 2014 on the file of the Additional

District Munisf Court, Namakkal.

For Appellant

: Mr.Gokul

for Mr.S.Senthil

For Respondent : Mrs.R.Sripriya

for M/s.V.Raghavachari Associates

J U D G M E N T

This Second Appeal is filed against the Judgment and

Decree dated 27.01.2021 made in A.S.No.08 of 2017, on the file

of the Additional Subordinate Court, Namakkal, confirming the

judgment and decree dated 28.09.2016 made in O.S.No.68 of 2014,

on the file of the Additional District Munisf Court, Namakkal.

2.

The appellant filed the suit seeking relief for

mandatory injunction, directing the respondent to receive house

tax for the house bearing No.4/95 in assessment No.2202, for the

Assessment Years 2012-2013, 2013-2014; for the house bearing

No.4/95-1, in assessment No.2203, for the Assessment Years 2012-

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2013, 2013-2014; to the house bearing No.4/95-2 in assessment

No.2204, for the Assessment Years 2012-2013, 2013-2014.

3.

The case of the appellant is that

(i) the suit property in Door Nos.4/95, 4/95-1, 4/95-2 at

Grama Natham of Belukuruchi Village, in S.No.390/1, comes under

jurisdiction of Namakkal Taluk. The appellant has been given

authorization to file a suit in the trust deed dated 15.12.2004.

The suit property, originally belong to the family of

Belukurichi Mittadarar. Prior to abolition of jameen, the suit

property was given to Kongunattu Gounders for constructing

temple and for other use. After abolition of jameen, the suit

property was classified as Grama Natham village in 1960. The

suit property was enjoyed by the Kongunattu Gounders for long

and they constructed a building in the suit property with two

floors. The building was assessed to tax in assessment

Nos.2202, 2203 and 2204. The door number for the assessment

No.2202 is 4/95, the door number for assessment No.2203 is 4/95-

1 and door number for assessment No.2204 is 4/95-2.

(ii) The appellant has been paying the house tax from 2011-

2012. When they tried to pay tax for the assessment years 2012-

2013 and 2013-2014, the present President of Belukurichi

Panchayat has not come forward to receive the house tax.

Therefore, a petition was given for receiving the house tax. On

07.02.2013, the Block Development Officer of Sendamangalam

directed the authorities to receive the tax for the suit

property. When the appellant attempted to pay the tax, the

respondent has not come forward to receive the tax. Then the

appellant took a demand draft for Rs.363/- representing the tax

for the period 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 and sent to the

respondent through registered post and the same was refused by

the respondent. When the suit property was assessed for tax for

2011-2012, it was not open to the respondent to refuse to

receive the tax amount, for the subsequent period. Therefore,

the suit for the aforesaid reliefs.

4.

The case of the respondent is that it is admitted that

the suit property is situated in S.No.390/1. It is the claim of

the respondent that, the suit property is neither Natham nor

Gramanatham but

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top