JUDGMENT - KHANDEPARKAR R.M.S., J.:---Heard the learned Advocates for the parties.

Perused the records.

2. The petitioners challenge the notices dated 16-3-2000 issued under sections 162 and 167 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (hereinafter called as "the said Act") as well as the order dated 22-1-2001 in relation to revision of rateable value as well as assessment of tax and the warrant of attachment dated 15-3-2002 issued by the respondents on account of failure to comply with the direction issued under order dated 22-1-2001. The challenge is sought to be raised on four grounds. Firstly that the revision of the rateable value of the land and consequential assessment of tax has been done in violation of the provisions of law as well as the decision of the Apex Court in (Bombay Municipality v. Polychem Ltd.)1, reported in A.I.R. 1974 Supreme Court 1779. Secondly, that the impugned order having been passed in exercise of quasi judicial function, the same should have been a speaking order and should have disclosed the reasons and in the absence thereof the order is not in consonance with the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of (Siemens Engg. Mfg. Co. v. Union

Click Here to Read the rest of this document