Kerala High Court
St.Mary'S Hospital vs Government Of Kerala on 3 May, 1996
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/17TH KARTHIKA 1934
WP(C).No. 18257 of 2009 (B)
---------------------------
PETITIONER:
-----------
ST.MARY'S HOSPITAL,KARINKALLATHANI,
THAZHEKKODU P.O.,PERINTHALMANNA,MALAPPURAM DIST.
REP.BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR,DR.SR.DOMINIC
AGED 61 YEARS,D/O.LATE MR.PAILY PATHROSE
ALILAKKUZHIYIL,RESIDING AT ST.MARY'S CONVENT,
KARINKALLATHNI, THAZHEKKODE P.O.,
PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DIST.
BY ADV. SRI.K.G.ANIL BABU
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
REP.BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
REVENUE (SPECIAL CELL) DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE TAHSILDAR, PERINTHALMANNA,
PERINTHALMANNA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,THAZHEKKODU P.O.,
PERINTHALMANNA,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV.SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAPIL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
08-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
AS
WP(C).No. 18257 of 2009 (B)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1: COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.754/1989 OF SRO ERNAKULAM.
EXT.P2: COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2276/86 OF SRO PERINTHALMANNA.
EXT.P3: COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.62/87 OF SRO PERINTHALMANNA.
EXT.P4: COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS VIZ.2004.
EXT.P4(A): COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS VIZ.2005.
EXT.P4(B): COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS VIZ.2006.
EXT.P4(C): COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS VIZ.2007.
EXT.P4(D): COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS VIZ.2008.
EXT.P5: COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE NUMBER OF SCANNING DONE
FOR THE YEAR 2003-04.
EXT.P5(A): COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE NUMBER OF SCANNING DONE
FOR THE YEAR 2004-05.
EXT.P5(B): COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE NUMBER OF SCANNING DONE
FOR THE YEAR 2005-06.
EXT.P5(C): COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE NUMBER OF SCANNING DONE
FOR THE YEAR 2006-07.
EXT.P5(D): COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE NUMBER OF SCANNING DONE
FOR THE YEAR 2007-08.
EXT.P6: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SAID PANCHAYATH REF.NO. A2-
155/155/96 DATED 3/5/1996.
EXT.P7: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 30/6/89 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
TAHSILDAR.
EXT.P8: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 7/11/1989 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE
2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P9: COPY OF THE REPORT SEND BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
GOVERNMENT AS PER REFERENCE K27213/89 DATED 18/5/2007.
EXT.P9(A): COPY OF THE REPORT SEND BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
GOVERNMENT AS PER REFERENCE K27213/89 DATED 23/4/2008.
WP(C).No. 18257 of 2009 (B)
EXT.P10: COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.G.O.(RT) 1472/09/RD DATED
18/5/2009.
EXT.P11: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3/6/2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P12: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 3/6/2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
AS
ANTONY DOMINIC,J
--------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.18257 of 2009
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of November, 2012
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a charitable institution, which has established a hospital. They are aggrieved by Ext.P10 order passed by the Government rejecting their application for exemption from the levy of building tax under the Kerala Building Tax Act. This claim is raised on the basis that being a charitable institution, it is entitled to such exemption, in view of Section 3(1)(d) of the Act. This question has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court in St.Sebastin's Visitation Hospital v. State of Kerala (2011(4) KLT 104), wherein it has been held thus:
"If the building is used for charitable purposes, then it is entitled to building Tax exemption, no matter the owner of the building is not engaged in any other charitable activity other than allowing the use of the building for charitable purpose. So much so, even a business concern is entitled to building tax exemption for any building used for charitable purpose. "Charitable purpose" W.P.(C).No.18527 of 2009 : 2 :
is given an inclusive definition under the Explanation. However, what is made clear is that medical relief is understood as charity by the Legislature only when it is rendered free. In other words, a charitable institution rendering medical relief on chargeable basis is not entitled to exemption from building tax for the hospital building where medical relief is not rendered free of cost."
In view of the above authoritative pronouncement by a Division Bench, Ext.P10 order challenged in the writ petition should be upheld. Therefore, the writ petition has to be dismissed and I do so.
Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ln