Anil Kumar Sen, J. - (1.) This appeal by the Corporation of Calcutta is directed against the judgment and order dated July 19, 1961 of the learned Judge, Court of Small Causes, Sealdah passed in an appeal under section 141 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred as the said Act) whereby the learned Judge has set aside the assessment by holding that the assessment as made by the assessor was ultra vires his powers.
(2.) The assessment is in respect of premises No. 6, Garcha 1st Lane which was being assessed as a bustee.
(3.) It appears from the notice under section 138 that such assessment was to take effect from the third quarter of 1950 - 51. The notice, however, does dot indicate whether the assessment is being made in.exercise of powers under S. 131 (1) or 131(1 A) of the Act. It is not in dispute that the general revaluation which was earlier made by the Corporation was with effect from July, 1946, so that the present disputed assessment was being made before the expiry of six years as prescribed by section 131(1) of the said Act. It is also not disputed that this assessment was made by the assessor in exercise of powers delegated to him and that such delegation is an old one dated April 2, 1924 then made by the then temporary Executive officer appointed under section 2(5) of the said Act before repeal of that provision in 1946. Such delegation, however, was in respect of powers under S.131(l)of the Act. Following the decision of this Court in the case of Corporation of Calcutta v. Gayatri Chatterjee, 63 C.W.N. 1002, the learned Judge, Court of Small Causes held that the earlier delegation conferred no authority on the assessor to make the intermediate reassessment proposed to be made in the disputed assessment before the expiry of six years. Accordingly, the learned Judge set aside the assessment as an ultra vires one. Being aggrieved by this decision the Corporation of Calcutta has preferred the present appeal.;