- (1.) The property unit No. B.II-1/1 is a cold storage situate at G.T. Road, Jullundur. It belonged to one R.K. Rai and devolved upon the petitioner as his son, after the death of the former. It is said that this unit was assessed to house tax on the annual value of Rs. 4,500/-.
(2.) On September 13, 1974, the father of the petitioner had received a notice under Section 67(1) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, that it was proposed to raise the annual value of the said property to Rs. 54,000/-. The petitioner's father raised objections against the proposed enhancement of the annual letting value of this property which was ultimately fixed by the Municipal Corporation on 12th February, 1975 at Rs. 50,000/- with effect from 1.4.1974. The petitioner's father filed an appeal against this valuation which was partly allowed and the annual letting value of the property was fixed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Jullundur, on 29th January, 1976 allowing a deduction of 60 per cent of the annual value fixed by the Corporation.
(3.) Being still aggrieved, the father of the petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition No. 2391 of 1976 in this Court against the order passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, which was decided by a Division Bench of this Court on 16th July, 1980. The relevant portion of the order passed by the Division Bench reads as under : "It is not necessary to state the facts as the learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the impugned orders be set aside and the case be sent back to the Municipal Corporation, Jullundur, for redetermining the annual rental value of the building in dispute, for the year 1974-75 in accordance with law. It is also agreed by the learned counsel for the parties that the Municipal Corporation would decide all the objections that may be raised by the petitioners. In view of what has been stated by the learned counsel for the parties, we allow this petition, set aside the impugned orders and direct the Municipal corporation to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law. The petitioners, if so advised, may file detailed objections within six weeks from today. In the circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs." The learned counsel for the petitioner stated at the Bar that he had submitted before the Division Bench that the annual value of the building could not be fixed at a rate higher than the standard rent which could be fixed under the rent control legislation and in that connection brought to the notice of the Division Bench Dewan Daulat Rai Kapoor etc. etc. v. New Delhi Municipal Committee another etc. etc., 1980 AIR(SC) 541, in which a similar view had been taken. We accept his statement on this point.;