Beg, J. - (1.) After issuing a notice to show cause why special leave should not be granted, this Court granted, on 13th October, 1976, the leave prayed for to appeal against the judgment and order of a learned Judge of the Delhi High Court. That Court had interfered, under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code, with the concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the Appellate Court in this case that, as the plaintiff could not make out a prima vacie case, no interim injunction could be granted to the respondent to restrain the appellant, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, from realising a sum of Rs. 27,216/- on account of house tax from the plaintiffs pending the disposal of a suit for a permanent injunction. This Court directed a hearing of this appeal on 28th October, 1976.Accordingly, the appeal is now before us.
(2.) The plaintiff had purchased a house in South Extension New Delhi, on 21st February, 1969, free from all incumbrances, demands, or liabilities under the sale deed, and the vendor, Mohan Singh, had undertaken to discharge these dues. It was, therefore, decided in a previous suit that defendant-appellant could not recover the whole amount sought to be recovered as house tax from him. The respondent was absolved from liability for the period before the sale. But, the plaintiff was liable to pay the tax for the period after the purchase. He had also paid Rs. 6,992/-. It appears that proceedings for realisation of dues subsequent to the purchase had then been taken by the appellant Corporation. The plaintiff's suit for a permanent injunction was brought on the ground that this assessment of house tax had proceeded on an erroneous basis.
(3.) It is matter of admission between the parties that the house on which the house tax was levied had not been let to any tenant since its construction. The Trial Court had found that, from the plaintiff's statement of accounts of tax, it appeared that the demand which was being recovered from him was in respect of the period subsequent to 31st March, 1969, and was based on a reateable value of Rs. 37,800/- per annum which had been provisionally adopted subject to results of proceedings in Courts of appropriate jurisdiction as to what the correct basis of assessment was. The trial Judge had granted an interim injunction initially, but, after hearing parties, had vacated it on 18th October, 1973, as he had found that no prima facie case was made out to grant it.;