- (1.) THIS appeal is by the assessee against an order, passed by the learned judge, Fourth Bench, Court of Small causes, Calcutta, in the matter of municipal assessment of the disputed premises No. 2, Netaji Subhash Road. The departmental assessment was confirmed by the said learned Judge. The period in question is the general revaluation period, commencing with the 4th quarter of 1956-57, i. e. from the 1st of January, 1957, The departmental assessment was Rs. 1,05,375|- as the annual value. This was confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner No. 2 of the corporation of Calcutta. Thereafter, the matter was taken on appeal, as provided by the statute, to the Court of small Causes, Calcutta, at the instance of the assessee. The learned Judge, however, dismissed the appellant's appeal and confirmed the annual value of the premises in question at the same figure, namely, Rs. 1,05,375/ -.
(2.) THE assessee, feeling aggrieved, has come up to this Court.
(3.) TWO points have been urged in support of this appeal by Mr. Banerji, learned Advocate for the appellant. In the first place, Mr. Banerji has submitted that the above animal valrne, which was arrived at on the basis of rs. 8,870/ - as the monthly rent for the disputed premises also included the rent for the additional advantage of the appellant's special right of way over the private lands of its landlord under the governing lease, which is Ext. 1 in this case. In the second place, it was urged that the additional figure of rs. 870/-, included to the above rent of rs. 8,870/-, was an additional load, which ought not to have been imposed on the disputed premises, as the same, representing rent of the mezzanrne floor, had already been included in tie rental of the disputed premises at the figure of Rs. 8,000/- at the previous general revaluation. Mr. Banerji also drew our attention to the fact that, although, under the relevant statute, annual valuation is to be assessed on the hypothetical fair rent, in the instant case, that assessment was made on the actual rent, which was not permissible under the said statute. With regarrd to this last contention, it may at once be stated that, in the absence of any other material relevant on the point, the actual rent may well be a good index of the hypothetical fair rent. From that point of view, making of the instant assessment on the basis or in the light of actual rent cannot be objected to.;