Back
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :P.N.BHAGWATI, N.K.VAKIL
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF AHMEDABAD - Appellant
Versus
JHAVERI KESHAVLAL LALLUBHAI - Respondent
First Appeal 301 of 1961
Decided On : 08/11/1964
Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act 1925 – Section 58 (j), 75, 76, 73, 84, 69 (1), 81, 77, 78 to 89, 98, 104, 110 – Chapter VIII – Valuation and Taxation Rules – Rule 243 320 350 350-A – Bombay District Municipal Act 1901 – Corporations Act – Declaration – Refund – Injunction – Tax – First Appeal – These appeals which are 306 in number arise out of several suits filed by various rate-payers against the Municipality in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) – Present appeals which are divided into two groups one group being of appeals preferred by the Municipality against the decision in regard to the assessment for the official year 1950-51 and the other group being of appeals preferred by rate-payers against the decision in regard to the assessments for the official years 1947-48 to 1949-50 – Held, In this view of the matter Court must hold that the learned trial Judge was right in taking the view that the assessment in regard to the official year 1950-51 was illegal and invalid but was wrong in taking the view that the assessments for the official years 1947-48 to 1949-50 were valid and legal – We therefore dismiss the appeals preferred by the Municipality and allow the appeals preferred by the rate-payers as also the cross-objections preferred by the rate-payers in the appeals preferred by the Municipality – In result court pass decrees in the several suits in favour of the rate-payers for refund of the respective amounts of tax paid by them for the official years 1947-48 1948 and 1949-50 together With interest on such amounts at the rate of 4 per cent per annum from dates of the respective suits till payment – There will also be an injunction in all the suits restraining the Municipality from recovering the amount of tax assessed on the rate-payers who have filed the suits for the official years 1947-48 to 1950-51 – The decrees passed by the learned trial Judge in regard to the assessments for the official year 1950-51 are confirmed – The Municipality will pay to the respective rate-payers who have filed the suits costs all throughout – Appeals By Municipality Dismissed – Appeals By Rate-Payers Allowed – Order Accordingly
( 1 ) THESE appeals which are 306 in number arise out of several suits filed by various rate-payers against the Ahmedabad Municipality (hereinafter referred to as the Municipality) in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Ahmedabad. The suits related to the levy of tax on open lands for the official years 1947-48 1948 1949 and 1950 Prior to 1st July 1950 the Municipality was a Borough Municipality governed by the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Boroughs Act ). There were in force during the period upto 31st March 1947 the Valuation and Taxation Rules made by the Municipality under section 58 (j) and sanctioned by the Government by their Resolution dated 14th February 1931 under section 76 prescribing various taxes leviable by the Municipality. It appears that sometime prior to 20th February 1947 the Municipality at a General Meeting passed a Resolution selecting tax on open lands for being levied by the Municipality and approving certain amendments in the Valuation and Taxation Rules prescribing such tax and specifying various particulars in relation to such tax set out in section 75. These amendments were sanctioned by the Government by a Resolution dated 20th February 1947 under section 76 and the amendments so sanctioned were published by the Municipality together with a notice reciting the sanction and the date and serial number thereof. The notice specified 1st April 1947 as the date from which the amendments shall come into force and the amendments accordingly came into force from 1st April 1947. One of the amendments was the substitution of Rule 243 and the new Rule defined valuation based upon capital. This definition became necessary because of the amendment of Rule 320. The amended Rule 320 in so far as it is material for our present purpose was in the following terms:-"320. The following direct and indirect taxes shall be levied by the Municipality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II. A rate on open lands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . of these the Water Rates the rate on open lands and drainage tax shall be levied as rates on buildings and lands. "rule 350-A was also added and the material portion of it read as follows:-"350-A. Except in the case of lands for which the water rates are leviable under Rules 322 to 350 the rate on open lands shall be levied as under:- (1) For the purpose of levy of rate on open lands the rateable area shall be determined as under: -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (II) Rate on the area of open land as determined above shall be levied at 12 of the valuation based on Capital and all such lands subject to exemptions hereinafter provided shall be liable to be charged the same. Exemptions :-The following open lands shall be exempt from the levy of the rate on open lands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "
( 2 ) IT will be seen that the tax under these Rules was to be levied at a percentage of the valuation based on capital. The Chief Officer then got an assessment list of all open lands within the Municipal limits prepared for the official year 1947-48 containing the particulars set out in section 78 and gave public notice of the assessment list and of the place where the assessment list or a copy thereof may be inspected. The public notice also invited objections to the valuation or assessment in the assessment list within the time fixed in the public notice. Objections to the valuation as also to the assessment were accordingly made by several rate-payers but before they could be heard and disposed of by the Standing Committee or the transferee under the Standing Committee one of the rate-payers namely Gordhandas filed Suit No. 124 of 1948 against the Municipality in the Court of the Civil Judge Senior Division Ahmedabad for a declaration that Rule 350-A read with Rul
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
