P.B.Mukharji, J. - (1.) This Rule was obtained by the Corporation of Calcutta against the order of the Small Causes Court, Calcutta deciding a point raised in the appeal before that Court under Section 183 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951. The objection of the Corporation of Calcutta before the Court of Small Causes in appeal was that the appellant Chandi Charan Basak who is the first opposite party here, was not competent to maintain the appeal under Section 183 of the Calcutta Municipal Act. The point raised in this application is of considerable importance for Calcutta and its citizens and rate-payers.
(2.) The facts relevant for the purpose of appreciating this point of law must be stated at the outset. Premises No. 363, Upper Circular Road, Calcutta, previously belonged jointly to six persons who are mentioned as opposite parties in this application including the said Chandi Charan Basak. It was assessed by the Corporation under Section 172(2) of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951 and an annual valuation of Rs.7427/- was fixed with effect from third quarter of 1957-58. Such valuation was to remain in force for a period of six years from the third quarter of 1957-58. On the 6th December, 1957 there was a partition of the said premises amongst the co-sharers. As a result of such partition, the ownership of the premises was sub-divided into several separate shares. Upon such partition all the opposite parties except the first opposite party Chandi Charan Basak and the seventh opposite party Kala Chand Basak addressed a letter to the Assessor of the Corporation of Calcutta dated the 17th February, 1958 requesting the Corporation to give separate number for each allotment and to separately assess each separate portion. It is said that the Assessment Department received this letter or application on the 9th April, 1958. A plan showing the distinct colours the different portions of the separate sub-divisions was enclosed with that letter. Documentary evidence was also produced by such appellants before the Corporation. Thereupon notices were issued to all the opposite parties including the first opposite party who is the main contestant before us. This notice is dated the 5th February, 1959 and is annexed to the affidavit-in-opposition of Chandi Charan Basak affirmed in these proceedings on the 22nd March, 1966. This notice proposed the valuation of each of the sub-divided shares and such proposal was contained in Annexure to that notice dated the 5th February, 1959. The portion allotted to Chandi Charan Basak was valued at an annual value of Rs.846/- in that proposal annexed to that notice. The notice expressly stated as follows:- "If any of the co-sharers is dissatisfied with the apportionment proposed he may prefer an objection in writing within six weeks from the date of the receipt of notice. On receipt of an objection from any of the shareholders, the case will be placed before the Deputy Commissioner and a notice of hearing will be given to all the parties. It will be at the discretion of the Deputy Commissioner to confirm the proposed distribution or to make a re-distribution of the valuations or to cancel the proposal altogether and restore the original valuation or to pass such orders, as he may deem proper under the provisions of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951."
(3.) Only the opposite party Satyendra Nath Sett objected to the proposal. Chandi Charan Basak who is the main contestant before us in this proceeding did not prefer any objection because the valuation allowed to his share apparently was unobjectionable and he was prepared to accept the same. According to the terms of the notice when the objection from Satyendra Nath Sett was received by the Corporation, the Corporation gave notice to all the other opposite parties by a notice dated the 5th May, 1951 saying that the objection will be heard and expressly requesting the opposite parties including Chandi Charan Basak "to appear before him either personally or by agent with evidence, oral or documentary in support of the apportioned valuation which you consider should be fixed for your share and wait till the case is disposed of.";