The tribunal ruled that municipalities can claim property dues independent of private agreements, emphasizing the unreceptive nature of indemnity clauses to municipal tax obligations.

Gaurang Kanth, J. :-

1. Affidavit-of-service filed in court today is taken on record.

2. The Petitioner, by way of the present writ petition, assails the legality and propriety of (i) demand notice dated 06.12.2024, (ii) letter of intimation dated 13.12.2024 and (iii) notice dated 02.01.2025 issued by the respondent-Kolkata Municipal Corporation in relation to the alleged arrears of property tax in respect of premises situated at 5B, 5^th floor, 71, Park Street, Kolkata.

3. It is the specific case of the Petitioner that he had entered into a registered Deed of Assignment and Sub-Lease dated 17.12.2019, primarily for commercial exploitation of the abovementioned property. As per the terms of the said registered instrument, it was clearly agreed between the petitioner and the private respondent nos.4 and 5 that all municipal levies and dues including property tax, accruing prior to the date of assignment i.e. 17.12.2019, would be the sole responsibility of the private respondent nos.4 and 5. The said private respondents further undertook to indemnify the petitioner against any liability arising from non-payment of such prior dues. However, on or about 14.03.2022, the Petitioner noticed that a demand of Rs.4,87,384/- had been affixed on the wall of the said premises by the respondent-Corporation. Upon making enquiries, the Petitioner came to know that the letter of intimation dated 31.01.2023 was addressed by the respondent- Corporation to respondent nos.4 and 5, whereby the outstanding amount was revised and shown to be Rs.6,76,896/-. In a bona fide attempt to resolve the issue and to avoid any disruption in his commercial activity, the Petitioner issued a demand draft of Rs .6,00,000/- dated 20.02.2023 in favour of the respondent no. 1. Receipt of such amount was duly acknowledged by the respondent no. 1 on 22.02.2023. Despite making the aforesaid payment, the Petitioner was subsequently served with a demand notice dated 06.12.2024 under Section 217 (1) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act , 1980, claiming a further amount of Rs.16,98,185.91/- towards outstanding property tax dues. Simultaneously, the petitioner was also provided with a letter of intimation dated 13.12.2024.

4. The Petitioner respectfully submits that, upon perusal of the said letter of intimation, it appears that the amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- already remitted by the Petitioner has not been duly adjusted against the outstanding demand, but instead has been reflected under the "Suspense Account" by the Respondent, Kolkata Municipal Corporation. The Petitioner further submits that despite his repeated attempts to facilitate a tripartite meeting between the respondent-Corporation and the private respondent nos.4 and 5, for the purpose of arriving at a resolution and proper allocation of liability, such meeting could not take place due to non-cooperation of the private respondent nos.4 and 5. Subsequently, the Petitioner has also been served with a notice for payment of alleged outstanding dues dated 02.01.2025 as well as a memorandum dated 02.01.2025, both issued to respondent nos. 4 and 5, claiming an enhanced amount of Rs.19,13,316/- as arrears of property tax. The Petitioner, aggrieved by the repeated and escalated demands, contends that he is liable to pay property tax only from the date of execution of the Deed of Assignment and Sub-Lease i.e. dated 17.12.2019 onwards and not for any period prior thereto.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the demand raised for the period prior to the entering of the lease deed and sub-lease, the property was in the exclusive possession and control of the private res