Salil Kumar Datta, J. - (1.) The only question involved in this appeal is whether Garden Reach Municipality was legally constituted. It appears that the Municipal Commissioners of the said municipality instituted a suit against the defendant-appellant for recovery of rates and taxes with a declaration of first charge amounting to Rs. 180/15/0/- which was due and outstanding in respect of Holding No. 496 Q, Golab Rab Lane, Police Station Matiaburuz from first quarter, 1946/47 to fourth quarter 1955-56. Material defence urged in the Courts below was that the plaintiff municipality was not legally constituted according to law. The trial court has rejected the above contention and decreed the suit which was affirmed on appeal. The present appeal is against this appellate decree.
(2.) It will be necessary to go into the history of the establishment of this municipality. Originally Garden Reach Municipality was constituted under the Bengal Municipal Act, 1884. By section 2 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923 this area was included within the Corporation of Calcutta and the operation of the Bengal Municipal Act, 1884 ceased with respect to the said area. In 1932 the Garden Reach Municipality Act, 1932 was passed when the area of Garden Reach formed a part of Calcutta. Section 8 of the Garden Reach Municipality Act, 1932 empowered the State Government to issue a notification constituting the Garden Reach area as a municipality for the purposes of Bengal Municipal Act, 1884. Thereafter, Bengal Municipal Act, 1932 was passed in December, 1932. The Government of West Bengal by a Notification No, 832M dated 1.2.1935 constituted the new Garden Reach Municipality specifying 1.4.35 as the date when this municipality was to come into existence. The defendants' contention was that the Garden Reach Municipality Act. 1932 referred to the Bengal Municipal Act, 1884 and not to the Bengal Municipal Act, 1932. The notification accordingly was illegal because section 8 of the Garden Reach Municipality Act empowered the State Government to issue notification For the purposes of the Bengal Municipal Act, 1'884 only and not for the purposes of the Bengal Municipal Act, 1932.
(3.) Section 10 of the Bengal General Clauses Act, 1899 provides a complete answer to this contention. Section provides as follows:- "Where this Act, or any Bengal Act (or West Bengal Act) made after the commencement of this Act, repeals and reenacts with or without modifications, any provision of a former enactment, then reference in any other enactment or in any instrument to the provision so repealed shall, unless a different intention appears, be construed as references to the provisions so reenacted." It will appear from section 2 of the Bengal Municipal Act, 1932 and its Schedule that the Bengal Municipal Act, 1884 was wholly repealed and reenacted when the notification was issued. That being the position, the provisions of section 10 of the General Clauses Act apply with full force and the Bengal Municipal Act, 1932 which was re-enacted in its place references to any other enactment or instrument to the acts so repealed will be deemed to be references to the act so reenacted. Accordingly on the basis of this provision the references in the Garden Reach Municipality Act, 1932 to the Bengal Municipal Act of 1884 is to be construed as a reference to the Bengal Municipal Act 1932. Accordingly the notification constituting the Garden Reach Municipality is legal and valid and contention of the appellant to the contrary is unacceptable. For the above reasons, this appeal fails and is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.;