RIJO JACOB Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are essentially aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment passed by the second respondent. There is no serious dispute as to the assessment and the dispute is only regarding the recovery in the sense that a portion of the amount is to be paid by the 5th respondent being the co-owner. Hence the prayer is that the liability of the petitioners may be limited to 2/3 and 1/3 may be recovered from the 5th respondent. There is no dispute that it is a joint construction. The apportionment is not the look out of the second respondent, since at the time of assessment, no such case was put up by the petitioners or the 5th respondent. Be that as it may, in case the 5th respondent is liable to pay one third, it will be open to the petitioners to recover the same from the 5th respondent. Without prejudice to such liberty to the petitioners to proceed against the 5th respondent, the writ petition is dismissed.