Judgment

SUBBA RAO, J. : This appeal by certificate from the order of the High Court at Calcutta raises the question of the true interpretation of the provisions of S. 127(a) of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923 (hereinafter called the Act).

2. The respondents are the owners of premises No. 296, Bowbazaar Street, Calcutta. The Corporation of Calcutta fixed the annual valuation of the said premises at a sum of Rs. 14,093 and directed the same to take effect from the second quarter of 1950-51. In fixing the annual valuation, the said Corporation took as basis Rs. 1,450 as the monthly rental value of the premises. On June 20, 1950, notice of the assessment based on the said annual valuation was served on the respondents. Respondent No. 1 filed objections to the said assessment under S. 139 of the Act. Meanwhile under the West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1950 (XVII of 1950), (hereinafter called the Rent Control Act), the standard rent of the said premises was fixed by the Rent Controller : the rent was fixed at Rs. 550 per month with effect from April, 1951, and at Rs. 632-8-0 per month with effect from August 1951. One of the objections raised was that the Co