D.S. Sinha, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Bharat Ji Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri G.D. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate representing the Municipal Board, Bareilly (now Nagar Mahapalika), the contesting respondent No. 3. These petitions are directed against the common order and judgment dated 20th October, 1984 passed by the learned District Judge, Bareilly, the respondent No. 1, deciding the appeals of the petitioners under Section 476 of the U.P. Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam, 1959, hereinafter called the Adhiniyam, and as such, are decided together by this judgment.
(2.) THE subject matter of writ petition No. 90 of 1985 relates to House No. 766, Civil Lines, Bareilly owned by Smt. Sushila Kumari Agrawal and the subject matter of writ petition No. 91 of 1985 relates to House No. 765, Civil Lines, Bareilly owned by Kanhaiya Lal Agrawal. For the purpose of Municipal Tax House No. 766 was assessed at an annual value of Rs. 27,000/ - and the House No. 765 was assessed at an annual value of Rs. 750/ -. The annual assessment of House No. 766 was enhanced to Rs. 51, 600/ - and annual assessment of House No. 765 was enhanced from Rs. 750/ - to Rs. 26,400/ -. Aggrieved by the enhancement in the annual value of the houses the petitioners filed appeals under Section 472 of the Adhiniyam, which were decided by the Judge, Small Causes Court by means of his two separate orders dated 14th March, 1983 and 30th April, 1983. The appeals of the petitioners were partly allowed. The learned Judge held that the appropriate annual value of the House No. 766 should be Rs. 42,000/ -. In respect of House No. 765 he found that the appropriate annual value should be Rs. 2,000/ -.
(3.) THE petitioners were not satisfied, and as such they filed second appeals under Section 476 of the Adhiniyam which were disposed of by a common order and judgment dated 20th October, 1984 passed by the learned District Judge, Bareilly, which is assailed in these petitions.;