IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Satyabrata Sinha and Dibyendu Bhusan Dutta
The Calcutta Municipal Corpn. – Appellants
Vs.
Paresh R. Kampani & Ors. –Respondent
G.A. No. 3637 of 1997, APO/T No.562 of 1997 & W.P. No. 217 of 1997
Decided On : February 10, 1998
Reasoned Order - Appeal against Valuation Order - The court held that the order passed by the Hearing Officer was not reasoned, and it is a well-settled principle of law that assignment of reason is one of the principles of natural justice. An unreasoned order is considered a nullity, especially when an appeal lies therefrom. The appeal and the application were dismissed.
Fact of the Case:
The appeal was directed against an order allowing a writ application questioning the validity of a valuation order for premises No. 21, Chanditola Mala Road, Calcutta.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the order passed by the Hearing Officer was not reasoned, and it is a well-settled principle of law that assignment of reason is one of the principles of natural justice. An unreasoned order is considered a nullity, especially when an appeal lies therefrom. Therefore, both the appeal and the application were dismissed.
Issues: Validity of the valuation order, requirement of a reasoned order, principles of natural justice
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of a reasoned order and the principles of natural justice in the context of the appeal against the valuation order.
Final Decision: Both the appeal and the application were dismissed.
Leave in terms of prayer (a).
2. The appeal is treated as on the day's list in view of the order proposed to be passed herein.
3. The appeal is directed against an order dated 9th April, 1997 whereby and where under the learned Trial Judge allowed the writ application filed by then writ petitioner/respondent questioning the validity of an order passed by the Hearing Officer. On an objection filed by the writ petitioner as regards the valuation of premises No. 21. Chanditola Mala Road, Calcutta the Hearing Officer passed the following order :-
“Assessee is present. See inspection report. Heard the assessee. Seen also I.B. After hearing both the parties and considering the matter the reasonable rent is fixed at Rs. 1,000/- and municipal annual value therefore come to Rs. 10,800/- after allowing statutory deduction as admissible.”
4. The learned Trial Jodge, In our opinion, has rightly held that, the said order is not a reasoned order. The Hearing Officer while disposing of the objection filed by in assessee is statutorily obliged to pass a reasoned order. It is now well settled principles of law that assignment of reason is also one of the limbs of principles of natural Justice and an unreasoned order is a nullity particularly when an appeal lies therefrom. When an unreasoned order is passed, even the Appeal Court would feel great difficulty in considering the same in its proper, perspective.
5. For the aforementioned reason both the appeal and the application are dismissed.
All parties are to act on a xerox signed copy of this dictated order an the usual undertaking.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.