In Harisankar v. Menon, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
Decision: 3.Having regard to the submission made bythe learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learnedStanding Counsel appearing for the respondent, thewrit petition is disposed of directing the 2[nd]respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3application for condonation of delay and Ext.P4 stay WPC NO...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 2 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 11TH BHADRA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 28683 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 02[nd] day of September, 2022
The petitioner has filed an appeal against Ext.P1order of assessment before the first appellateauthority namely, the 2[nd] respondent. The petitionerhas also filed an application for stay along with anapplication to condone the delay in filing theapplication. Pending consideration of the applicationfor condonation of delay and consideration of theapplication for stay, recovery proceedings have beeninitiated to recover the amounts due under Ext.P1order. Hence, this writ petition.
2.Heard the learned Standing Counsel also.
3.Having regard to the submission made bythe learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learnedStanding Counsel appearing for the respondent, thewrit petition is disposed of directing the 2[nd]respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3application for condonation of delay and Ext.P4 stay
WPC NO.28683 of 2022
application with notice to the petitioner within aperiod of two months from the date of receipt of acertified copy of this judgment.
Till such time orders are passed on the
applications as above, further proceedings forrecovery of any amounts due under Ext.P1 order shallbe kept in abeyance. It is made clear that the 2[nd]respondent needs to consider the stay applicationonly if he finds sufficient reason to condone the delayin filing the appeal.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28683/2022
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:EXHIBIT P1
EXHIBIT P1COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DTD. 20-12-2019EXHIBIT P2COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIOENR BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 20-12-2021 EXHIBIT P3COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIOENR BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 26-12-2021EXHIBIT P4COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIOENR BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 20-12-2021
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
TRUE COPYP.A.TO JUDGE
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.