Gupta, J. - (1.) This Rule issued at the instance of the Corporation of Calcutta is directed against the order passed by the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, allowing the application filed by the opposite party before us in an appeal preferred under Sec. 183 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951.
(2.) The opposite party is the owner of the premises No. 44 Park Street, Calcutta. Admittedly, the entire premises were leased out to the President of India. The Corporation of Calcutta assessed the annual valuation of the premises on the basis of actual rent realised by the opposite party from the premises with effect from the first quarter of 1968 -69. The opposite party filed objection to this valuation under Sec. 181 of the said Act. The Deputy Commissioner II who heard the objection under Sec. 182 of the Act by his order dated July 16, 1970, also proceeded on the basis of the actual rent realised from the premises, reduced the annual value assessed by allowing certain deductions towards expenses. From the decision of the Deputy Commissioner II the opposite party preferred an appeal to the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, under Sec. 183 of the Act. In this appeal the opposite party made an application for leave to adduce evidence with regard to the market value of the land comprised in the said premises and the cost of construction of the building. The learned Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes by his order dated May 31, 1972, allowed the application. It is the propriety of this order which is in question in this Rule.
(3.) In disposing of the application the Court below observed, in our opinion rightly, that the Municipality was not free to assess any arbitrary annual value and that the test is what rent the premises in question can lawfully fetch if let out to a hypothetical tenant. In the case Corporation of Calcutta v/s. Union Jute Mills Company Ltd., (1955) 60 C.W.N. 153 a Division Bench of this Court held that the rent which is actually realised from the premises may in ordinary circumstances be taken to be the rent at which the premises might reasonably be expected to let and that when it is found that the actual rent realised does not represent the reasonable rent, one is free to assess reasonable rent by recourse to other material considerations.;