Non-compliance with Rule 9 of the Taxation Rules to the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act renders the assessment of house tax non-est in law.

This second appeal has been preferred against the judgment in A.S.No.211 of 2005 on the file of the Additional Sub-Judge, Kumbakonam, which had arisen out of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.138 of 2003 on the file of the First Additional District Munsif, Kumbakonam.

2. The plaintiff, who had lost her case before the Court below has preferred this second appeal. The plaintiff had approached the Court challenging the order of enhancement of house tax from Rs.357/-per half-year to Rs.3,517/- per half-year for her house bearing Door No.9/763, Andiyappan Street, Kumabkonam. After receiving Ex.A.1, the plaintiff had preferred a petition dated 16.12.2002 requesting the defendant-Municipality to reassess the tax as per the fair rent principles and also after following the Rule 9 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act. But without conducting any enquiry the defendant had revised the house tax suo moto from Rs.365/- per half-year to Rs.3,517/- per half-year, which necessitated the plaintiff to approach the Court by way of a civil suit.

3. The defendant in his written statement would contend that as per section 82 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, (amendment act 65/97 & 34/98) there is no need for the Municipality to give any opportunity before revising the house tax and only on the basis of Ex.B.1 & Ex.B.2 assessment was made and the house tax was enhanced in accordance with law.

4. The learned trial Judge has framed three issues. The plaintiff has examined herself as P.W.1 and exhibited Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.6. On the side of the defendant, the Revenue Inspector of Kumbakonam Municipality was examined as D.W.1 and Ex.B.1 to Ex.B.4 were marked. After going through the evidence both oral and documentary the learned trial Judge has dismissed the suit, which necessitated the plaintiff to approach the first appellate Court in A.S.No.211 of 2005.

5. The learned first appellate Judge, after scanning the evidence and after giving due deliberations to the submission made by the counsel on either side, has come to the conclusion that there is no reason to interfere with the findings of the learned trial Judge and accordingly dismissed the appeal, thereby confirmed the findings of the learned trial Judge, which made the plaintiff to knock at the doors of this Court by way of this second appeal.

6. The substantial questions of law involved in this second appeal are as follows:-

i) Whether the first appellate Court can go beyond the pleadings and hold that the fair rent principles need not be followed while assessing the property tax under the District Municipalities Act?

ii) Whether the first appellate Court can rely upon the calculation which is based on Act 65/1997 and 34/1998 which is not notified?

iii) Whether the first appellate Court can hold that the act has come into force till the notification that the act is not notified is notified in the year 2005 in the absence of a prior notification that the Amending Act 65/97 and34/98 is notified?

iv) Whether the Municipality can assess without giving opportunity to the appellant prior to the same is converted into a demand by entering in the assessment book to make the same a demand?

v) Whether the assessment by the Municipality without giving opportunity to the assessee is valid under law?

vi) Whether the assessment in violation of the Municipality Act in force by the Municipality is valid under law?

7. The Point:- 7(a) Heard Mr.M.V.Santharaman learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.K.Raj Kumar the learned counsel appearing for the respondent and considered their respective submissions.

7(b) The impugned order of assessment raising the half-yearly house tax for the plaintiff’s house bearing door No.9/763, Andiyappan Street, Kumbakonam, from Rs.365/- to Rs.3,517/- is Ex.A.1. D.W.1 is the Revenue Inspector of the defendant-municipality. According to him, as per the amended act of 65/97 and 34/98 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920, Ex.A.1-assessment wa