The petitioner is the owner and in possession of 14.55 Ares of land in resurvey No.171/12, Block No.34 of Pattimattam village. In fact, he obtained the property by partition in the family. The partition deed number is given as 2358/1988 dated 28.06.1988 of Puthencruz Sub Registrar's office. Mutation has also been effected and the petitioner has been paying the tax also.
2. The present difficulty of the petitioner is that on the basis of an attachment of property of the petitioner ordered by the Sub Court, North Paravoor in O.S.No.261/2006, tax is not being collected. According to the petitioner, the said suit is filed by one Valsala from which an appeal is pending before this Court as R.F.A.No.164/2008.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the light of the decision of this Court in Joseph Kurian vs. Village W.P.(C) No.9189/2012 2 Officer (2010 (3) KLT 251), the stand taken by the respondents is not correct. Mainly because of the attachment, there cannot be any refusal to collect the tax. In fact, after the petitioner failed to get any positive response from the Village Officer, he has filed a representation before the Tahsildar as per Ext.P3. In Joseph Kurian's case (supra), this Court has held that attachment of property cannot prevent the authority from receiving tax. The said principle will therefore apply herein.
The petitioner will make available a copy of the above decision before the Tahsildar. There will be a direction to the Tahsildar to issue appropriate instructions in the matter after taking a decision on the representation Ext.P3 submitted by the petitioner expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp