SA(MD). No.542 of 2005

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI

( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

Monday, the Twenty Fifth day of October Two Thousand and

Twenty One

PRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN

SA(MD). No.542 of 2005

1.E. Muthiah

2.M.Seetha

... Appellants/Respondents/Plaintiffs

Vs

TIRUNELVELI CORPORATION

MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER

TIRUNELVELI-11.

... Respondent/Appellant/Defendant

Prayer :-

This Second Appeal filed under section 100 of CPC to set aside

the judgment and decree dated 13.08.2004 passed by the Principal

District Judge, Tirunelveli in A.S. No.205 of 2003 reversing the

Judgment and Decree dated 07.03.2003, passed by the I Additional

District Munsif, Tirunelveli in O.S. No.394 of 2002 and allow this

appeal.

DECREE

: This Second Appeal coming on for hearing on this day and

upon perusing the Grounds of Appeal, the judgment and Decrees of the

Lower Appellate Court and the Court of First instance and the

material papers in the suit and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.

S.Kumar, Advocate for the Appellants, and Mr. Aayiram K.Selvakumar,

Advocate for respondent and this Court while allowing the Second

Appeal doth order and decree as follows:

(i) that the judgment and decree dated 13.08.2004 passed by the

Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli in A.S. No.205 of 2003

reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 07.03.2003, passed by the I

Additional District Munsif, Tirunelveli in O.S. No.394 of 2002 is

set aside and the decision of the trial Court is restored.

(ii) That the defendant Corporation be and hereby is permited

to withdraw whatever amount that has been credited by the

plaintiffs to the credit of the suit.

(iii) That the respondent be and hereby is permitted to redo

the entire exercise and directed to adhere to the statutory

procedure, while assessing the property tax of the suit building.

(iv) that the respondent be and hereby is not only to reassess

the property tax for the suit property, but also effect revisions

for the subsequent period.

1/2

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

SA(MD). No.542 of 2005

(v) that the appellant be and hereby is not entitled to raise

the plea of Limitation.

(vi) that the appellant will be entitled to the benefit of

vacancy remission as provided in Section 127 of the Coimbatore City

Municipal Corporation Act, 1981, as and when the respondent does so.

(vii) that the defendant be and hereby is directed to give

vacancy remission as contemplated by law.

(viii) That there be no costs in this Appeal.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar (CS-I)

// True Copy //

/ /2021

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

TO

1.The Principal District Judge,

Tirunelveli.

2.The I Additional District Munsif,

Tirunelveli

Copy to:

The Record Keeper,

V.R. Section,

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai (2 Copies)

+1 CC to M/s.S.KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-32462 dated 25/10/2021 )

ORDER DATED : 25/10/2021

==========================

DECREE

==========================

SA(MD). No.542 of 2005

Allowing the Second Appeal preferred

against the judgment and decree

dated

13.08.2004, passed by the

Principal

District

Judge,

Tirunelveli

in

A.S.No.205/2003

reversing the Judgment and Decree

dated 07.03.2003, passed by the I

Additional

District

Munsif,

Tirunelveli in O.S. No.394 of 2002

as stated within.

AM(CO)

GC(04.12.2021) 2P 6C

2/2

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