The court emphasized that the Petitioner had an alternative legal remedy and could file a suit for mandatory injunction against the Corporation for restoration of the water connection.

JUDGMENT

Banerjee, J. - This is an application u/s 45 of the Specific Relief Act for an order on the Respondent (1) to restore free of charge the filtered and unfiltered water connections to the market at premises No.180, Kalighat Road, Bhowanipore, and (2) to re-call and/or cancel the demand notices, dated respectively May 22, 1947 and June 21, 1948.

2. The facts are these. The Petitioner is one of the sons and heirs of the late Sm. Samarangini Ray Choudhurani (hereinafter called the owner), who was one of the recorded joint owners and occupiers of the said market and as such claims to have a right of property in the market.

3. It is alleged in the petition that the market was supplied with filtered and unfiltered water by the Corporation of Calcutta for domestic purposes and charges therefore were included in the consolidated rate and realised as such.

4. On or about May 22, 1947, the Corporation served a notice on the owner to the effect that at a meeting held on January 8, 1947, it had resolved that the "filtered water supply to markets and bazaars and the unfiltered water supply for cleansing the stalls, drains and streets (paths) of markets and bazaars" should be charged u/s 230 of the Act at the ordinary rates for supply of water for on-domestic purposes. In the notice the Corporation stated that the quarterly charge was Rs.312 and demanded payment of a sum of Rs.595-5-0 for the period from January 9, 1947 to June 30, 1947.

5. In reply on June 30, 1947, the owner wrote to the Corporation that the premises in question were assessed at a valuation of Rs.20,290 and filtered and unfiltered water connections were allowed for domestic purposes on the basis of the said amount for the use of the vendors, and added: "If under the present Corporation Rules no domestic connections are allowed, we should have been given notice and should have been given the option either to retain or reduce the connection in case of payment. Your notice dated 2nd May, 1947, is barely a month old and we would request you to give us three months' time to arrange to reduce the connection."

6. The owner concluded by asking the Corporation not to charge the fees demanded, as no facilities had been given to the owner to make arrangement for reduction of the connection.

7. On July 7, 1947, the Corporation wrote to the owner that the filtered and unfiltered water supplies (except for privy and urinal flushing) in the markets being treated as supplies for non-domestic purposes, the question of privileges due to valuation of the premises did not arise. "If you consider the charges to be high, you may get them reduced by reducing the sizes of the existing connections through a licensed plumber."

8. The owner has requested to remit without delay the sum of Rs.596-5 to cover the charges from 9th January, 1947 to 30th June 1947.

9. The Corporation by its letter, dated July 29, 1947, made a demand again and said, "Please note that in default, provisions of the Act will be enforced."

10. Acknowledging receipt of the letters, dated July 7 and July 29, the owner wrote to the Corporation:

You have treated the water supply - both filtered and unfiltered - to premises No.180, Kalighat Road, as supplies for domestic purposes all along and would have charged fees if the supply has been for non-domestic purposes. If the Corporation now chooses to treat the supply of water to the market as supplies for non-domestic purposes, it is a new connotation that has been introduced and, therefore, the Corporation cannot, suddenly, without giving proper notice to the owners of the market, demand any sum for such supply as has been stated in your said letter.

11. After making two intermediate demands, the Deputy Executive Engineer, Water Works, on February 4, 1948, wrote to the owner : "I beg to invite your attention to this office letter . . . and request you to remit to this office the sum of Rs.1,532-5 without further delay."

12. There was a further demand on April 23, 1948, and again on May 1