K. Ramamoorthy, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner had purchased a flat in the Complex put up by Amrit Cooperative Group Housing Society (Rashmi Apartments), Harsh Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi. On 6. 7. 1992 the petitioner informed the Corporation that he had paid the dues to the Society and he had become owner and he had taken the possession of the flat also.

( 2 ) THE respondent Corporation being fully aware of the position proceeded to assess the flat for the purpose of determining the property tax payable thereon. Assessment order was passed on 25. 3. 1998 fixing the rateable value at Rs. 31,990. 00. The petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 169 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 to the learned Addl. District Judge contending inter alia that no notice was served on the petitioner and no opportunity was given to him to file his objections and the order of assessment was wholly void.

( 3 ) THE plea before the learned Addl. District Judge by the M. C. D. was that notice was served on Amrit Cooperative Group Housing Society and that is notice on the petitioner. No separate notice was required to be served on the petitioner for concerning the issue of rateable value for passing the assessment order.

( 4 ) THE learned Addl. District Judge has given a finding that no notice was served on the petitioner. The finding by the learned Addl. District Judge is :

"the appellant Counsel first of all contended that in this case no notice was served upon the appellant for proposing the R. V. On the other hand, JLO submits that a consolidated notice was served upon Amrit Cooperative Group Housing Society and the copy of such notice has been placed on record. No doubt the personal notice was not served upon the appellant and so the appellant was not given the opportunity to file the objections. "

( 5 ) HAVING given the finding the learned Addl. District Judge proceeded to consider on the merits with reference to fixing of rateable value and the learned Addl. District Judge fixed the rateable value at Rs. 20,400. 00 as against that was fixed by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 31,990. 00 w. e. f. 1. 4. 1994. This is challenged by the petitioner in the revision petition.

( 6 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. H. L. Narula submitted that by virtue of provisions of Sections 124 and 126 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 the Corporation when it had received intimation on 6. 7. 1992 while making the first assessment order in respect of the flat is obliged to give notice under Section 124 (3) of the Act. The failure to do so was completely vitiated the proceedings.

( 7 ) THE learned Counsel for the respondent Ms. Amita Gupta submitted that there was no mutation effected showing the petitioner as the owner of the flat and notice was issued to Amrit Cooperative Group Housing Society and according to the learned Counsel the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case reported in Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Trigon Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. , 62 (1996) DLT 222 (SC), would govern this case and, therefore, the order of assessment passed by the Assessing Authority, as notified by the learned Addl. District Judge, fixing the rateable value at Rs. 20,400. 00 cannot be called in question by the petitioner.

( 8 ) THE fact that the order of assessment was made for the first time with reference to the flat of the petitioner is not in dispute. The Assessing Authority proceeded to pass the assessment order treating the petitioner as owner of the flat cannot also be disputed. Section 124 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 reads as under:

"124 Assessment list-- (1) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the Corporation shall cause an assessment list of all lands and buildings in Delhi to be prepared in such form and manner and containing such particulars with respect to each land and building as may be prescribed by bye-laws.

(2) When the assessment list has been prepared the Commissioner shall give public notice th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document