Das, J. - (1.) This is an appeal by the Assessee, the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, under Section 142(3) of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923, against a decision of Shri S.C. Biswas, Judge, Third Bench, Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, dated January 7, 1952.
(2.) The disputed property being premises No. 1A, Park Street,, Calcutta, measuring 33 cottas belonged to the Appellant, the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal. At the general revaluation the disputed premises were assessed at an annual value of Rs. 21,600 to come into effect from January 1948. Against the assessment made by the Corporation of Calcutta the Assessee did not prefer an appeal to the Court of Small Causes under Section 141 of the Calcutta Municipal Act. In 1948-1949 there was an intermediate revaluation of the disputed premises. The Assessment Department valued the disputed premises under Section 127(a) of the Calcutta Municipal Act, the annual value was ascertained to be Rs. 27,000 to take effect from April 1, 1948. The letting value per month was determined to be the sum total of Rs. 465 the ground rent of the disputed premises, Rs. 850 royalty payable on advertisement hoardings, Rs. 685 consideration for the use of the hoarding by the lessee and Rs. 500 rent of a pump house erected by the lessee on the disputed premises. Against the assessment so made the Assessee filed an objection under Section 139 of the Calcutta Municipal Act. The objection was heard by Janab A. Sattar, Deputy Executive Officer (I) of the Corporation of Calcutta under Section 140 of the Calcutta Municipal Act. By his order, dated May 16, 1949 the annual value was reduced to Rs. 17,782 to take effect from April 1, 1949. The ground rent was taken to be Rs. 465, the royalty of the hoarding Rs. 850 and the rent of the pump house Rs. 350, that is, in all Rs. 1,665. No letting value was fixed for the hoarding in question. The Assessee preferred an appeal under Section 141 of the Calcutta Municipal Act. The appeal was dismissed by the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, by an order, dated September 3, 1949. The learned Chief Judge did not enter into the merits of the case but dismissed the appeal on the preliminary ground that the Appellant (the Assessee) was dis-entitled to question the intermediate revaluation as the Assessee had not preferred an appeal against the order of the Assessment Department passed in January 1948. Against the decision of the Chief Judge the Assessee preferred an appeal to this Court. The appeal was allowed and the case was remitted to the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, for re-hearing on the merits. The case was then placed before the learned Judge, Fourth Bench, Court of Small Causes, Calcutta. Before the learned Judge two points were raised on behalf of the Assessee.
(3.) In the first place, it was contended that the advertisement hoarding was not a building and that in ascertaining the annual value the royalty received by the Assessee should not have been taken into consideration. It was next contended that the basis of assessment was wrong, that the Corporation of Calcutta was not right in assessing the disputed premises under Section 127(a), the assessment should have been made under Section 127(b) of the Calcutta Municipal Act. The learned Judge overruled both these objections and affirmed the assessment made by the Corporation of Calcutta.;