Wp(C)/10872/2007 Of Sajan Mani v. Agricultural Income Tax Officer And Ors

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/24TH ASWINA 1934 WP(C).No. 10872 of 2007 (T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SAJAN MANI, S/O LATE SRI K.O.MANI, KANIYARKZHIYIL HOUSE, KARIKUNNAM P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT- 685 586. BY ADVS.SRI.SREELAL N.WARRIER, SRI.SIVARAM.R. MENON. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTTAYAM. KOTTAYAM. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM. COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM. 3. TAHSILDAR, VAITHIRI TALUK, WYNAD DISTRICT. WYNAD DISTRICT. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.K. SHAIJ RAJ. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Prv. W.P.(C).NO.10872/2007-T: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: CERTIFICATE OF NO LIABILITY GIVEN BY CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT DTD. 21/02/2005.DTD. 21/02/2005. EXT.P.2: CERTIFICATE OF NO LIABILITY GIVEN BY CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA DTD. 21/03/2005.DTD. 21/03/2005. EXT.P.3: ORDER DTD. 07/04/2005 OF THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM.ERNAKULAM. EXT.P.4: SALE DEED NO. 703 OF 2005 OF SRO, KALPETTA DTD. 26/02/2005. EXT.P.5: SALE DEED NO.704/2005 OF SRO, KALPETTA DTD. 26/02/2005. EXT.P.6: SALE DEED NO.705 OF 2005 OF SRO, KALPETTA DTD. 26/02/2005. EXT.P.7: NOTICE OF SALE UNDER SECTION 49 OF KERALA REVENUE RECOVERY ACT DTD. 19/02/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.3.ACT DTD. 19/02/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.3. EXT.P.8: ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD. 19/05/2006 OF THE R.1. FOR THE YEAR 2001-02.YEAR 2001-02. EXT.P.9: ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD. 19/05/2006 OF THE R.1. FOR THE YEAR 2002-03.YEAR 2002-03. EXT.P.10: ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD. 19/05/2006 OF THE R.1. FOR THE YEAR 2003-04.YEAR 2003-04. EXT.P.11: ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD. 19/05/2006 OF THE R.1. FOR THE YEAR 2004-05.YEAR 2004-05. EXT.P.12: APPEAL DTD. 17/12/2006 IN FORM 26 TO THE R.2. AGAINST EXT.P.8. ASSESSMENT ORDER.ASSESSMENT ORDER. EXT.P.13: APPEAL DTD. 18/12/2006 IN FORM 26 TO THE R.2. AGAINST EXT.P.9 ASSESSMENT ORDER.ASSESSMENT ORDER. EXT.P.14: APPEAL DTD. 18/12/2006 IN FORM 26 TO THE R.2. AGAINST EXT.P.10 ASSESSMENT ORDER.ASSESSMENT ORDER. EXT.P.15: APPEAL DTD. 18/12/2006 IN FORM 26 TO THE R.2. AGAINST EXT.P.11. ASSESSMENT ORDER.ASSESSMENT ORDER. EXT.P.16: INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION DTD. 18/12/2006 FOR URGENT HEARING AND DISPOSAL OF EXT.P.12. APPEAL.AND DISPOSAL OF EXT.P.12. APPEAL. EXT.P.17: INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION DTD. 18/12/2006 FOR URGENT HEARING AND DISPOSAL OF EXT.P.13. APPEAL.AND DISPOSAL OF EXT.P.13. APPEAL. W.P.(C).NO. 10872/2007-T: EXT.P.18: INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION DTD. 18/12/2006 FOR URGENT HEARING AND DISPOSAL OF EXT.P.14. APPEAL. EXT.P.19: INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION DTD. 18/12/2006 FOR URGENT HEARING AND DISPOSAL OF EXT.P.15 APPEAL. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC,J ---------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.10872 of 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 16[th] day of October, 2012 JUDGMENT Exts.P8 to P11 are the orders of assessment passed by the Agricultural Income Tax Department. It appears that theproperty, in relation to which, the assessment has beencompleted, has been purchased by the petitioner by Exts.P4 toP6 and in this writ petition what he seeks is that he should beallowed to get himself impleaded in the appeals and prosecute theappeals on that basis. 2. If the appeals referred to above are still pending consideration of the second respondent, I see no reason why theprayer shall not be granted. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC,J ---------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.10872 of 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 16[th] day of October, 2012 JUDGMENT Exts.P8 to P11 are the orders of assessment passed by the Agricultural Income Tax Department. It appears that theproperty, in relation to which, the assessment has beencompleted, has been purchased by the petitioner by Exts.P4 toP6 and in this writ petition what he seeks is that he should beallowed to get himself impleaded in the appeals and prosecute theappeals on that basis. 2. If the appeals referred to above are still pending consideration of the second respondent, I see no reason why theprayer shall not be granted. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing that sincethe appeals are still pending, the petitioner will be allowed to gethimself impleaded in the appeals and on that basis, the appealswill be dealt with. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. ln Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE