High Court of KeralaRP/619/2015allowed

Commercial Tax Officer v. Najeeb, S/O.Mammu Haji

2015-07-23Honourable Mr. Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2015/1ST SRAVANA, 1937 RP.No. 619 of 2015 (I) ------------------------------- JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 17485/2015.

...........

REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN THE WPC: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOYILANDI - 673620.

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE-673001.

3. THE TAHSILDAR(REVENUE RECOVERY), VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE-673001.

BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SMT.SOBHA ANNAMMA EAPEN RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER AND 4TH RESPONDENT IN THE WPC: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. NAJEEB, S/O.MAMMU HAJI, THEYYATHANKANDY HOUSE, AVADUKKA, KOZHIKODE-673528.

2. T.K.SHAJIM, S/O.MUHAMMED, ALFA - THAZHEKUNNIYIL HOUSE, KAKKANCHERRY POST, KOZHIKODE - 673620.

BY SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

mbr/

RP.No. 619 of 2015 (I) ------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE R3(A) :

THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 27.4.2015.

ANNEXURE R3(B) :

THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE REPORT DATED 10.6.2015 BY THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, VADAKARA.

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:

NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE mbr/

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

------------------------------------ R.P.No.619 of 2015 in W.P.(C).No.17485 of 2015 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2015

O R D E R

This review petition is filed by the State seeking review of the judgment dated 11.06.2015 in W.P.(C).No.17485/2015 on the ground that, the property was auctioned on 10.06.2015 before the date of judgment and without considering the same, this Court directed to defer the revenue recovery proceedings till the remedy before the appellate authority is exhausted.

2. In view of the fact that the sale has been taken place before the judgment, it is necessary to review the judgment. Accordingly, this review petition is allowed. The writ petition is restored to file. Status quo as on today shall be maintained for a period of ten days. The petitioner shall implead the auction purchaser on record.

Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.