M.M. Dutt, J. - (1.) This appeal is at the instance of the Defendant, Commissioners of Konnagar Municipality (hereinafter referred to as the Company) and it arises out of a suit for a declaration, permanent injunction and for determination of annual value.
(2.) The case of the Plaintiff Company is that the Company is the owner of holding No. 43 Grand Trunk Road, within P.S. Uttarpara in the district of Hooghly, comprising land measuring 0 -41 acres together with buildings and fixtures. The Defendant, Konnagar Municipality, purported to assess the annual value of the said holding under Sec. 128 of the Bengal Municipal Act, 1932, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in course of the quinquennial general revaluation of holdings for 1951 -52 and increased the annual value of the said holding from Rs. 1,200 to Rs. 3,717. The Company objected to the said valuation by an application under Sec. 148 of the Act which was heard by the Review Committee of the Municipality under Sec. 149 of the Act. The Review Committee dismissed the objection of the Company on April 3,1953, and confirmed the assessment of the annual value as made by the assessor. The main grievance of the Company is that the Municipality acted illegally and without, jurisdiction in assessing 347 electric lamp posts of the Company fixed on municipal land throughout the limit of the, Municipality as holdings or part of the said holding No. 43. The Company does not dispute the assessment and valuation of the said holding No. 43 the annual value of which has been assessed at Rs. 464. The Company has prayed for a decree cancelling the entire valuation of Rs. 3,717 as illegal and ultra virus and for a further declaration that the entire valuation is a nullity. In the alternative, it has been prayed that the lawful annual value of the said holding be determined at Rs. 464. There is also a prayer for permanent injunction restraining the Municipality from enforcing the demands and/or issuing any tax bills for collecting tax on account of the entire valuation.
(3.) The Municipality entered appearance and contested the suit by filing a written statement. The Municipality denied that the valuation of the said holding including the said lamp posts at Rs. 3,717 was cither illegal or ultra virus, as alleged by the Company. It was contended that the lamp posts were holdings within the meaning of the Act and that the Municipality was entitled to assess the said lamp posts as holdings.;