ATM Enterprises vs The Chairman, Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board, The Area Engineer, CMWSSB and T.C. Kunhanhu

M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the

Respondents 1 and 2.

At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner had submitted that the Petitioner would

pay the entire amount of Rs. 1,18,332/-, demanded by the second Respondent, by the impugned demand notice, dated 31.03.2011, in four equal

monthly installments. He had further submitted that the first installment would be paid on or before 30.04.2011. The subsequent installments shall

be paid by the Petitioner in the last week of the succeeding months.

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents 1 and 2, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court. He has

also submitted that even though the impugned demand notice had not been issued to the Petitioner, it would be open to the Petitioner to pay the

arrears of Water Supply and Sewerage Tax and the charges, as per the impugned demand notice, dated 31.03.2011.

In such circumstances, the Petitioner is directed to pay the amount of Rs. 1,18,332/-, as per the impugned demand notice, dated 31.03.2011,

issued by the second Respondent, in four equal monthly installments, beginning from 30.04.2011. The subsequent installments shall be paid during

the last week of the succeeding months, viz., May, June and July, 2011. If the Petitioner defaults in the payment of the installments, as stated

above, it would be open to the Respondents 1 and 2, to initiate appropriate action, as per law, to recover the tax, as well as the charges leviable,

in respect of the property in question.

The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.