- (1.) THE plaintiff's case is that he is the owner of the premises in question. The Corporation of Calcutta assessed the annual valuation of that premises with effect from the 3rd quarter of 1960-61 fixing the annual valuation at Rs. 1080. 00, He preferred Municipal Appeal no. 41 of 1963. It was allowed and the annual valuation reduced to Rs. 810. 00. In spite of such fixation of the annual valuation, the Corporation has illegally sent some tax bills stating the valuation of the premises in question at Rs. 3834,00. No special notice was served before sending these tax bills. The Corporation failed to perform its statutory duty. So such act is void and without jurisdiction. No such taxes could be realised from him. The suit is for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from issuing tax bills and from realising taxes on the basis of such annual valuation of Rs. 3834. 00.
(2.) THE defendant filed a written statement alleging, inter alia, that the plaintiff had no cause of action and the suit was not maintainable. The assessment in question was lawfully made from the third quarter of 1962-63. The plaintiff did not raise any objection thereto. Hence the court has no jurisdiction to try the matter.
(3.) THE learned Munsif held that the notice under section 180 of the Calcutta municipal Act was served on the plaintiff. But in view of the decision in 4 Dominion law Reports 116, the valuation could be made without service of such notice. If no notice was given, it did not make the valuation ultra vires. There were subsequent additions and alterations of the building by the plaintiff regarding the premises in question. So the assessment was validly made. The suit was thus dismissed. The plaintiff filed an appeal and lost the same. Hence the second appeal.;