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

2024 Supreme(Mad) 695

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
The South Indian Film Chamber of Commerce – Petitioner
Versus
The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation and Others – Respondents
W.P. No. 6428 of 2024, W.M.P. No. 7147 of 2024
Decided On : 12-03-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: C. Jagadish.
For the Respondent: P. Prithvi Chopda.

IMPORTANT POINT
The interpretation of Rule 262 and the land registration document is crucial in determining the basic street rate for property tax assessment.

Headnote:

Property Tax - Interpretation of Rule 262 - Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Rules, 2023 - [Rule 262(2)(b)]

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, challenged the provisional assessment order for property tax based on the application of basic street rate for Anna Salai instead of T.R. Sundaram Avenue. The dispute centered around the interpretation of Rule 262 and the land registration document.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the impugned order did not consider the petitioner's submissions regarding the interpretation of the sale deed and the plan sanction in determining the basic street rate. As a result, the court quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter for re-consideration by the District Revenue Officer.

Issues: Interpretation of Rule 262 and land registration document in determining the basic street rate for property tax assessment.

Ratio Decidendi: The basic street rate for property tax assessment should be determined with reference to the land registration document, considering the sale deed as a whole and taking into account the schedule thereto. The impugned order should consider all relevant submissions and provide a reasonable opportunity for re-consideration.

Final Decision: The impugned order was quashed and the matter was remanded for re-consideration by the District Revenue Officer. The petitioner was directed to be provided with a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, and a fresh speaking order was to be issued within a maximum period of four weeks.

JUDGMENT :

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records leading to the impugned order passed by the 4th respondent in Z.O.IX.R.D.C. No. R1/7079-2/2023 dated 27.02.2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to assess the property tax based on the basic street rate fixed for T.R. Sundaram Avenue.

1. Order dated 27.02.2024 of the District Revenue Officer and Zonal Officer, Zonal Office 9 of the Greater Chennai Corporation is under challenge. The petitioner is a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. The society asserts that an immovable property is vested in accordance with the above enactment. According to the petitioner, the property is situated at T.R. Sundaram Avenue and not at Anna Salai. Consequently, when the basic street rate applicable to Anna Salai was sought to be applied, the petitioner submitted several representations. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court by challenging the provisional assessment order dated 09.09.2022. By order dated 07.11.2023, the provisional assessment order was quashed and the matter was remanded for re-consideration. Pursuant to such order, after submitting representations on 22.11.2023 and 13.12.2023, the order impugned herein was issued on 27.02.2024.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the impugned order and pointed out that the order refers to Rule 262(2)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Rules, 2023. According to learned counsel, the said rule requires that the basic street rate be determined on the basis of the land registration document. By referring to the sale deed dated 12.12.1957, learned counsel submits that the said document should be read as a whole and that if the schedule of the sale deed is taken into consideration, it would be evident that the property opens on the east through a 40 feet road, which is currently called as T.R. Sundaram Avenue.

3. Mr. P. Prithvi Chopda, learned standing counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. By referring to Rule 262(2)(b) of the above mentioned rules, he submits that the basis of fixing the basic street rate is the land registration document. According to him, the land registration document indicates clearly that the Door Number is 122, Mount Road. He further submits that the petitioner’s property was assessed on the basis that it is situated at Anna Salai and not on T.R. Sundaram Avenue prior to the general revision. Therefore, he contends that there is no infirmity in the impugned order.

4. The dispute turns largely on the interpretation of Rule 262 read with the Explanation thereto. The said Rule is set out below:

    “262. Method of assessment of property tax:

(1) Every building shall be assessed together with its site and other adjacent premises occupied as an appurtenance thereto unless the owner of the building is a different person from the owner of such site or premises.

(2)(a) The annual value of the lands, buildings and storage structures shall be deemed to be the gross annual rent at which they may reasonably be expected to be let out from month to month or year to year, subject to a ten percent deduction of that portion of such annual rent which is attributable to the building or storage structure alone apart from their sites and adjacent lands occupied as an appurtenance thereto and the said deduction shall be in lieu of all allowances for repairs or on any other account as per section 83 of the Act.

(b) The rental values of lands, buildings and storage structures shall be as per the basic zonal values as calculated by the municipality and approved by the Council.

Explanation - For the purpose of this rule ‘basic zonal value’ shall be read as ‘basic street rate’ in the case of Chennai City Municipal Corporation, the street of the land, building or storage structure for the purposes of assessment of property sha

    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