Back
2014 Supreme(Kar) 752
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
RAM MOHAN REDDY, J.
SMT SHANTA M GAD 7 ORS. – PETITIONERS
VERSUS
ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER BRUHAT BANGALORE MANAHAGARA PALIKE RAJARAJESHWARI DIVISION BRUHAT BANGALORE MANAHAGARA PALIKE BANGALORE – 60 & ANR. – RESPONDENTS
WRIT PETITION NOS.67346751/2013 (LBBMP)
Decided on: 19.12.2014
Advocate Appeared:
Sri. M.S BHAGWAT, ADV.
Sri. B.V SHANKARA NARAYANA RAO, ADV.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that properties without legal title and buildings erected in violation of the Act and the Byelaws are susceptible to assessment to property tax under section 108A[3] of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976.
Headnote:
Property Tax - Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 - Section 108A, Rule 11 - The court discussed the provisions of section 108A and Rule 11 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, which provide for the levy and collection of property tax from buildings and vacant land. The court emphasized that properties without legal title and buildings erected in violation of the Act and the Byelaws are susceptible to assessment to property tax under section 108A[3] of the Act. The court also highlighted the inconsistency between the provisions of Rule 11 and section 108A, and the lack of statutory compulsion for the circular issued by the Commissioner of BBMP. The court held that the circular was without the authority of law and quashed the notice and extracts of Form 'B' register related to the petitioners' properties.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent/Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to transfer katha of the properties belonging to the petitioners by assigning property identification number [PID] and katha number, in the register in accordance with section 114 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976. They also sought quashing of a circular providing for assessment of certain buildings and issue of 'B' Katha, contending that it was illegal since not supported by the Act or the Rules.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the properties without legal title and buildings erected in violation of the Act and the Byelaws are susceptible to assessment to property tax under section 108A[3] of the Act. The court also held that the circular issued by the Commissioner of BBMP was without the authority of law and quashed the notice and extracts of Form 'B' register related to the petitioners' properties.
Issues: The issues involved the validity of the circular providing for assessment of certain buildings and issue of 'B' Katha, and the obligation of BBMP to transfer katha of the properties belonging to the petitioners by assigning property identification number [PID] and katha number in accordance with section 114 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that properties without legal title and buildings erected in violation of the Act and the Byelaws are susceptible to assessment to property tax under section 108A[3] of the Act. The court also highlighted the inconsistency between the provisions of Rule 11 and section 108A, and the lack of statutory compulsion for the circular issued by the Commissioner of BBMP.
Final Decision: The court quashed the notice and extracts of Form 'B' register related to the petitioners' properties, and directed the respondent/BBMP to ensure necessary amendments to the Rule to include in Form B register assessment to tax of properties which do not have approvals and sanctions under various applicable enactments, falling within the purview of section 108A[3] of the Act, rather than include them in Form A register. The court also directed the respondent/BBMP to ensure assignment of 'property identification numbers' to all properties falling within its jurisdiction, irrespective of being assessed or not assessed to levy of property tax.
Petitioners aggrieved by the order dated 18.8.2011 Annexure-A of the 1st respondent insofar as it relates to extracts of Form B Register, Annexure ‘B’ Series, have presented these petitions for a writ of mandamus, to direct the respondent/Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, for short ‘BBMP’, to transfer katha of the properties belonging to the petitioners by assigning property identification number [PID] and katha number, in the register in accordance with section 114 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, for short ‘Act’. In addition, petitioners seek quashing of the circular dated 25.8.2009 Annexure-C.
2. According to the petitioners, they having purchased undivided right, title and interest in the immovable property and the residential apartments in the Multi Storied Residential Apartment Complex, applied for property tax assessment of the apartments, whence the 1st respondent by order dated 18.8.2011 Annexure-A recorded findings that the building was not compliant with The Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Building Bye Laws 2003, for short ‘Bye laws’ as also the ‘Act’, while assessing the said properties to tax under the ‘Act’, following which issued extracts of Form-B property register, Annexure-B series. In addition, it is contended that the circular dated 25.8.2009 Annexure-C providing for assessment of certain buildings and issue of ‘B’ Katha, is illegal since not supported by either the ‘Act’ or the Rules.
3. Petitions are opposed by filing statement of objections, inter alia contending that petitions are not maintainable as petitioners have not assailed the validity of the circular dated 25.8.2009 based upon which the notice dated 18.8.2011 Annexure-A is issued and further that the ‘B’ Katha was introduced during the year 2009 and made mandatory in respect of properties which are not compliant with Byelaws and have no valid legal sanctions as well as disputed title, while properties which are legal are eligible for being entered in ‘A’ register. It is further stated that such of those properties which do not have approval and sanctions under the various enactments are entered in the ‘B’ register since basic civic amenities, water, electricity etc., are provided and therefore the need to levy property tax on such properties. In addition, it is stated that petitioners cannot claim as a matter of right for issuance of regular katha numbers by assigning property identification numbers.
4. Heard learned Counsel for the parties who reiterate the contentions advanced in their respective pleadings.
5. In order to appreciate the submissions, it is useful to refer to section 108A of the ‘Act’, providing for levy and calculation of property tax. Suffice it to extract subsection [3] of section 108A, which reads thus:
“[3] The Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike may levy and collect the property tax from every building, vacant land or both including a building constructed in violation of the provisions of building byelaw or in an unauthorized layout or in a revenue land or from a building occupied without issuance of occupancy or completion certificate except the building constructed illegally in Government land, land belonging to any local body, any statutory body or an organization owned or controlled by the Government. The property tax collected from such building shall be maintained in a separate register:
Provided that levy and collection of property tax under this subsection from such building does not confer any right to regularize violation made, or title, ownership or legal status to such building. Such buildings shall always be liable for any action for violation of law in accordance with the provisions of this Act or any other law.”
6. Section 108A was inserted by Act No.2/2009 with effect from 13.1.2009 and on which day ‘BBMP’ Property Tax Rules, 2009, for short ‘Rules’, was also brought into force. Rule 11 of the ‘Rules’ reads thus:
“11. Property Register:
The property tax collected from the owner/occupier
