Decided on September 17,1976

Ganesh Properties Pvt. Ltd. Appellant


B.C. Ray, J. - (1.)This Rule was issued on an application in connection with a First Mise. Appeal preferred against the judgment and order passed in appeal being Municipal Appeal No. 81 of 1963, dismissed by the Third Bench, Small Cause Court, Calcutta, praying for a Rule and an order for interim injunction restraining the Respondent opposite party Corporation of Calcutta from realising taxes on the basis of the enhanced assessment made in 1960 -61 by the Deputy Commissioner, Corporation of Calcutta and upheld by the learned Judge, Small Cause Court, Calcutta, in the aforesaid appeal. It has been stated in the petition that the impugned assessment is wholly illegal and arbitrary as it has been made without any reference to the annual rent realised from the tenants occupying the said premises and the enhancement has been made arbitrarily from the annual value which was assessed in 1956 -57 to an amount of Rs. 3,22.502 to Rs. 5,63,072. It has also been alleged in the said petition that the Corporation of Calcutta has not assigned any reason for such inordinate increase in the annual value of the said premises being premises No. 12B Lower Circular Road. It has also been stated that under Sec. 207 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, since the appeal has been preferred before this Court under Sec. 183(3) of the Calcutta Municipal Act, the valuation that has been made on the objection by the Deputy Commissioner, Corporation of Calcutta and affirmed in appeal by the Third Bench, Small Cause Court, Calcutta, is not final and as such it is fit and proper that the interim order that has been made by this Court restraining the opposite party from realising taxes on the basis of the increased valuation till the disposal of the Rule should continue and the Rule should be, accordingly, made absolute. It has further been contended by Mr. Dutta, appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, that in accordance with Sec. 207 of the said Calcutta Municipal Act, the opposite party is not entitled to realise tax on the basis of the enhanced valuation so long as the instant appeal is pending before this Court.
(2.)In support of the above contention, Mr. Dutta has cited two decisions reported in Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal v/s. Corporation of Calcutta : 58 C.W.N. 537and Sitaram Poddar v/s. The Commissioners of Howrah Municipality : 59 C.W.N. 1069.
(3.)Mr. Dutta has next contended that the recent Ordinance which has been promulgated by the Governor being Ordinance No. 15 of 1976 has not been given any retrospective effect and as such, the amended provision which has been incorporated by Sub -section (3A)(a) and (b) of Sec. 183 of the Calcutta Municipal Act is not applicable in respect of the present appeal which has been filed long before the coming into force of the said Ordinance. In this connection, Mr. Dutta has submitted that it cannot be said that the right to file an appeal and also the payment or deposit of any tax against which the instant appeal has been preferred is a procedural matter, but a substantive provision affecting the rights of the parties and that being so, unless the Ordinance has been given retrospective effect expressly, those provisions of the Ordinance cannot be made applicable retrospectively to this appeal which has been filed before the promulgation of the said Ordinance.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.