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

1904 Supreme(All) 67

STANLEY, BURKITT
Municipal Board of Mussoorie – Appellant
Versus
H. B. Goodall – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

STANLEY, J.

1. Of the grounds of appeal mentioned in the memorandum of appeal, two only have been pressed in argument before us. The others have been abandoned, The two points which have been pressed are—(1) that the suit is barred by limitation, and (2) that the Municipality are not responsible for the wrongful acts of their Secretary. The suit was brought by the plaintiff for damages for an alleged illegal distress. The circumstances being shortly as follows:— In July, 1898, the Municipal Board of Mussoorie, acting under rule 54 of their bye-laws published a list of houses within the limits of the Municipality, and the assessments made in respect of those houses for the purpose of calculating house-tax. According to this assessment, the value of the plaintiff's house was increased by a sum of Rs. 200, namely, from, Rs. 1,000, at which it has been valued previously, to Rs. 12,000, the value stated in the assessment. Notice of this assessment was duly published on the 28th of July, 1898, and thereupon Mr. Goodall, the plaintiff appealed against the assessment to the Board. The appeal was rejected. Subsequently, on the 23rd of August, 1898, Mr. Keating, the Secretary of the

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top