1985 Supreme(MP) 707

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Ram Pal Singh, J.
Radhabai – Applicant
Versus
Commissioner Municipal Corporation - Non-applicant
Cr. No. 102 of 1982 (G)
Decided On : 16-04-1985

Headnote:(1) Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (M.P.) – S. 147, 149, 403 and 158 – objections or appeal against assessment of house – tax pending – payment of tax during pendency of proceedings should be in accordance with last year – s assessment.

       (2) Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (M.P.) – S. 158 & 147 – payment of tax during pendency of objections under S. 147 – shall be in accordance with provisions under S. 158.

       (3) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – O. 41, R. 5 – Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (M. P.) – S. 158 – stay in appeal against assessment of house – tax – should be granted as per provisions of S. 158 of the Act.

        Short Note

       1. The petitioners preferred an appeal in accordance with the provisions of section 149 of the Act before the District Court, Gwalior and also moved an application during the pendency therein for the stay of the recovery of the house – tax for the year 1976 – 77 till the decision of the appeal.

       2. The learned District Judge dismissed that application on the ground that no irreparable injury is likely to be caused to the petitioners, if the stay is not granted. Aggrieved by this short order, the petitioners have invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court.

       Held: Short point to be considered is that if the appellate authority refuses the stay, what amount was required, according to law to be deposited by the petitioners?

       3. The scheme of the Act is well enumerated in sections 147, 148, 149, 158 and 159 of the Act. According to section 147, after the receipt of the notice, petitioner has to file objection with regard to the valuation of the property proposed to be made by the Corporation, rejects the objections, the assessee has got a right of appeal in the Court of District Judge, in accordance with the provisions of section 149, of the Act. To decide the present question the provisions of section 158, of the Act are very clear and it reads thus;

       "158. Payment of property tax how affected by objections to valuation. – When an objection to a valuation has been made under section 147 the property tax shall pending, the final determination of the objection, be paid on the previous valuation,"

       (Emphasis supplied)

       4. Thus, where the matter is pending before the Property Tax Officer or the Commissioner or the District Judge, the provisions of section 158 of the Act are clearly applicable for all the three authorities. The principle given in section 158 of the Act envisages that till the final adjudication of the valuation, if the authority insists upon the assessee for the payment of the amount of the tax, it should be in accordance with the last year's assessment.

       5. Thus, it is clear that the District Judge was wrong in not giving relief to the petitioner.' The District Judge ought to have ordered that the petitioners should till the final determination of the objection, should deposit the property tax, instead of depositing on the valuation, i.e. on the annual letting value proposed for the year 1976 – 77 amounting to Rs. 28,836.00, on the annual letting value fixed for the year 1975 – 76 i.e. Rs. 14,796.00. Revision allowed.