Judgement

SARKAR, J. (For himself and Raghubar Dayal, J.) : These (two appeals arise out of proceedings for ascertainment of the annual value of premises No. 12, Mission Row, Calcutta, occupied by the appellant. The annual value was ascertained with a view to assess the municipal rates payable in respect of the premises. The appeals raise a common question of law making it unnecessary to deal with them separately, that question being whether the order of remand made by the High Court at Calcutta to the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta for ascertaining the annual value was justified.

2. The annual value was ascertained under the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923. This Act was repealed and replaced by the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951 as from May 1, 1952, but as the valuation had originally been made by the respondent Corporation under the repealed Act it is that Act by which the question that arises will have to be determined.

3. We may at this stage profitably refer to some of the sections in Ch. X of the Act for giving an idea of its scheme regarding the ascertainment of the annual value. Section 124 provides that a consolidated rate not exceeding twenty-three per cent on the annual valuati