ROSAMMA THOMAS Vs. KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPALITY BUILDING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners in all these writ petitions are owners of commercial buildings situated in Kottayam Municipality. They challenge the demand notices issued to them demanding property tax for their respective buildings. In some of the writ petitions, the Government Order dtd. 6/3/2019, directing collection of property tax on plinth area basis from 1/4/2016 is also challenged.

(2.) W.P.(C) No. 29844 of 2022 is treated as the leading case in this batch of writ petitions. Petitioner in the said writ petition is the owner of two buildings in Kottayam and had been paying property tax upto second half of 2021-22. However, in 2022, she was served with two demand notices for property tax for a period of five years i.e., from 2016-17 onwards. According to the petitioner, the demand notices have been issued without complying with the procedure prescribed by law for assessing property tax and that tax has been demanded with retrospective effect, with one hundred percent hike from the existing rate of tax. Petitioner also alleges that demand has been made without even giving credit to the tax already paid till the second half of 2021-22. Petitioner has also pleaded that the demand of property tax is barred by limitation and that tax has been assessed without following the requirements of law and hence the demands are unenforceable.

(3.) In W.P.(C) No.8590 of 2023 and a few other cases, apart from challenging the mode of assessment, it is also pleaded that the demand notices have not been issued in the form prescribed under the Rules and hence the demand notices are without authority of law. In some of the petitions, petitioners have sought for directions to conduct a fresh assessment of property tax for the buildings involved therein as per the provisions of the applicable statutory provisions. Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.10624 of 2023, has also challenged the Government Order dtd. 6/3/2019, permitting levy of property tax with effect from 1/4/2016.