G. N. Ray, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against judgment dated December 21, 1995 passed by the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1558 of 1995. It may be stated here that against the earlier judgment of the High Court passed in the said Civil Misc. Writ Petition, this Court was moved by filing S.L.P. (C) No. 4280 of 1995. Such Special Leave Petition was disposed of by this Court and by order dated July 24, 1995, the writ petition was remanded to the High Court for fresh adjudication in the light of observations made in the judgment of this Court.
(2.) The appellant was inducted as a tenant on the ground floor of a building numbered as 29 Mainganj Ward No.4, Block No.2, Kabra Market, Etah, within the limits of Etah Municipality at a monthly rental of Rs.75/- with effect from March, 1973 by the owner landlord respondents Sri Shanti Swarup Jain.
(3.) For the purpose of appreciating rival contentions of the parties in this appeal, the following facts which are on record appear to be relevant. (a) The Executive Officer, Municipal Committees, Etah, gave notice dated November 15, 1977 to the owner landlord respondent Sri Shanti Swarup Jain under Section 143 of U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916 that in respect of house Nos. 29, 29-A and 29-B of Mohalla Mainganj of Block No. 2, Ward No.4 of the said Etah Municipality, the annual valuation had been fixed at Rs.1,800/- and the House Tax for the said premises had been assessed at Rs.90/-. It was indicated in the said notice that if the landlord had any objection, such objection would be filed during the working hours on December 20, 1977 or earlier. It may be indicated that originally the House No.29 before reconstruction was a single stored building. After reconstruction the building comprises ground, first and second floor and such reconstructed building has been numbered as House Nos. 29, 29-A and 29-B. The receipt of said notice of the Municipality under Section 143 was acknowledged by the owner respondent on November 25, 1977. (b) In reply to the said notice of assessment, the owner respondent filed his objections that the assessment of House Tax was high and that only one shop was let out on a monthly rental of Rs.75/- and the remaining portion of the building was lying unused. In the said objections the owner landlord did not state that the construction of the said house Nos. 29, 29-A and 29-B was not completed. (c) On January 30, 1978, the building constructed by the respondent was inspected by the Section Head Clerk of the Municipality and a report was filed by the said Head Clerk recording that the ground floor and the first floor had been rented respectively at Rs.75/- and Rupees 60/- per month and the second floor of the building was in possession of the respondent owner. In the said report it was indicated that the shop was well constructed. (d) The Municipality issued a letter dated January 30, 1978 to the respondent which was received by him on January 31, 1978, intimating the date for hearing the objections to the assignment of the house tax, was fixed on February 1, 1978 at 11.00 a.m. An order of the assessment in respect of the said house Nos. 29, 29-A and 29-B was passed on February 2, 1978. Such assessment was, however, challenged by the respondent and the assessment of house tax ultimately came into effect from April 1, 1981 on the conclusion of pending litigation on account of challenge of the order of assessment of House Tax. ;