( 1 ) THE questions which arise for my consideration on this reference under Clause 36 of the Letters Patent have not been formulated by the Division Court which heard the appeal; but on going through the dissentient judgments of the two differing Judges (Guha Ray and Sen JJ.) I understand that they differed on the following questions: 1. Whether in determining the annual, value of a building under Section 127 (a), Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923 the Corporation of Calcutta is bound by the standard rent fixed by a Rent Controller under the West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1950.

( 2 ) WHAT is the meaning of the expression "at the time of the assessment" occurring in Section 127 (a), Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923?

( 3 ) WHETHER in tin's particular case it can be said that a standard rent was in existence at the time of the assessment. 2. I am not very sure whether I have -any jurisdiction to frame questions under Clause 36 of the Letters Patent for the purpose of answering them; but at the same time I am not inclined to reject this reference on this technical ground when I have been able to understand the points CL difference on a perusal of the