JUDGMENT

B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.- Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted. Heard S/Shri G.L. Sanghi, Rohinton Nariman, V.R. Reddy and Andhyarujina for the appellants and S/Shri F.S. Nariman, Soli Sorabjee, B.K. Mehta for the respondents.

3. These appeals are preferred against the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in a batch of first appeals. Two questions arise for consideration, viz., (i) whether a tenant of a building is entitled to file and maintain an appeal against the order assessing the property tax under the provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 as applicable in the State of Gujarat and (ii) whether proviso (aa) to sub-clause (a) of clause (1-A) of Section 2 of the said Act is valid and effective. Clause (1-A) defines the expression "Annual Letting Value". Proviso (aa) says that where in respect of any building or land or premises, standard rent is not fixed under Section 11 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1944 (Bombay Rent Act) "the annual rent received by the owner in respect of such building or land or premises shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, be deemed to be the an