SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Guj) 183

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :DEV KANT TRIVEDI, K.M.MEHTA
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF AHMEDABAD - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
First Appeal 18 of 1983
Decided On : 04/07/2003

Advocates Appeared: D.N.Patel, PRASHANT DESAI

Headnote:

Civil procedure Code, Section 96 – Constitution of India,Article 265 – Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954 –against the judgment and decree in Civil Suit filed by the plaintiff learned Judge by his impugned judgment has held that the Union of India - the defendant is exempted from liability of incremental contribution under the provisions of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954 – facts giving rise to this appeal are as under the Municipal Corporation - plaintiff had filed a Civil Suit before the City Civil Court, and prayed for a decree that defendant Union of India be directed to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 1,03,139. 25p. 00 with 6% interest from the date of the suit till the payment and costs – learned counsel has referred to plaint and other documents in connection with Town Planning Scheme, 15 and made following submissions on there was a property namely piece of land originally bearing Survey of part of situated in the area of ad-measuring 50890 square yards –Held, Court have considered what is meant by tax and what is meant by fees and considered the of the Apex Court in the case of and also the principle laid down by G. P. Singh in his well known treatise. From the aforesaid pronouncement of law, it emerges, in our view, that tax is a compulsory contribution to the support of Government which is levied on persons, property, income, commodities, transactions etc person has no did not get any benefits out of payment of tax. No tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law under Article 265 of the Constitution of India. On the other hand, as regards fees, they are charged for special service rendered to individual or a class by some governmental agency amount of fee levied is supposed to be based on the expenses incurred by the Government in rendering the service though in some cases the costs are arbitrarily assessed. Fee is a payment for a special benefit or privilege. learned Judge that the suit is maintainable at law but we quash and set aside the of the learned trial Judge that the Union of India is not liable to pay incremental contribution in view of Article 285 of the Constitution of India for the reasons which we have given in this behalf – Appeal is allowed.

K. M. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) AHMEDABAD Municipal Corporation - appellant original plaintiff has filed this appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the judgment and decree dated 26th February, 1982, in Civil Suit No. 2680 of 1977 filed by the plaintiff. The learned Judge by his impugned judgment has held that the Union of India - the defendant is exempted from liability of incremental contribution under the provisions of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as `the said Act ).

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are as under:- 2. 1 the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation - plaintiff had filed a Civil Suit No. 2680 of 1977 before the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, and prayed for a decree that defendant Union of India be directed to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 1,03,139. 25p. 00 with 6% interest from the date of the suit till the payment and costs. The said amount represents "incremental contribution" levied by the plaintiff under the provisions of the said Act. 2. 2 mr. P. G. Desai, learned counsel has referred to plaint and other documents in connection with Town Planning Scheme, Ahmedabad 15 and made following submissions on facts: 2. 2 (A) there was a property namely piece of land originally bearing Survey Nos. 154 and 155 of Dariapur Kazipur Asarwa part of Final Plot No. 4 situated in the area of Dariapur Kazipur ad-measuring 50890 square yards. The plaintiff declared its intention to make the Town Planning Scheme for the area covering part of the revenue village of Asarwa, Dariapur, Kajipur under its Resolution No. 46 dated 1. 5. 1953. 2. 2 (B) it was further submitted that the then Government of Bombay thereafter made further resolution on 9. 11. 1953 and refused to sanction the intention of the plaintiff Corporation - local authority till the area was included within the limits of the local authority. The local authority thereafter declared its intention again to make a scheme by its resolution dated 1. 2. 54. The then Government under its resolution dated 25. 5. 56 sanctioned the intention to make the draft town planning scheme for the area. The area under the scheme was situated on the northern boundary of the Corporation limits. It is bounded on the north by the cantonment area, on the south by Magazine Fort and the area of Town Planning Scheme, Ahmedabad No. VII on the east and west by the area of Town Planning Scheme, Ahmedabad No. 8. The total area comprised in this scheme is 75 Acres approximately. The area being adjacent to the magazine fort was prohibited for building use under Government Military Notification. It, therefore, remained undeveloped though quite ripe for building purposes. With the withdrawal of Government Notification and consequential removal of restriction for the development of this area for building purposes, it became fit for immediate development. But as it had no internal accesses and facilities for public services like water, drainage, lighting etc. , quite essential for promotion of development, it remained barren and undeveloped. In order to extend these services and facilitate the speedy development of the area, the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation got this area included within its limits. 2. 2 (C) the plaintiff in making this scheme, made departure from its past practice of planning an area under a Town Planning Scheme and prepared a comprehensive development scheme in such a way that the smallest building unit could get direct pucca approach with all public services, after keeping sufficient lands reserved for public purposes. The plaintiff accordingly prepared and published the draft scheme by a Notification in the extra-ordinary issue of Bombay Government Gazette dated 28. 3. 1957 (Part-II ). The draft scheme so prepared and published was ultimately sanctioned by Government under its Notification dated 12. 12. 1957 subject to certain conditions mentioned therein. 2. 2 (D) the learned counsel submitted that in exercise of the powers conferre











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top