- (1.) The present appeal arises out of the judgment and decree of the Courts below wherein the suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction has been granted to the appellant-respondent and recovery of Rs. 8,76,430/- sought to be imposed against the plaintiff on arrears of house tax on the ground of being illegal unjust, arbitrary and not binding on the rights of the plaintiff. However, the trial Court gave liberty to the defendant/appellant Corporation that the defendant shall be entitled to start proceedings afresh against the plaintiff after issuing show cause notice to it and allowing it to raise objections and to assess house tax after considering the same.
(2.) The suit was filed by the plaintiff that the recovery which was sought to be imposed against the plaintiff of house tax is illegal, unjust, arbitrary and not binding on the rights of the plaintiff through coercive method, since it was a company incorporated under the Companies Act and was in possession of land which was owned by M/s R.J. Wood & Company Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at Chandni Chowk, Delhi. The said R.J. Wood & Company and the plaintiff company were both different and distinct legal identities besides having different administrative controls. By an award of the Arbitrator dated 9.5.1987 which was made rule of Court by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on 20.7.1987, the property consisting of land and building situated at 12/4, Mile Stone, Mathura Road, Faridabad was transferred by way of a registered instrument i.e. sale deed dated 7.5.1990 for a consideration of Rs. 21,00,000/- in terms of the decree of the said court. It was alleged that house tax on the land and buildings falling in the area of Faridabad Complex had been levied since August 1975 and the property had been the subject matter of house tax. The Director of the Company Shri Krishan vide letter dated 7.2.1990 had informed the then Chief Administrator, Faridabad Complex Administration that the property in question vested in the plaintiff instead of R.J. Wood & Company and thereafter late Shri Krishan had personally approached the officials of the defendant but instead of mutating the property in favour of the plaintiff, the defendant kept on addressing some letters to M/s R.J. Wood and Company.
(3.) Accordingly, it was held that predecessor of the defendant did not follow any mandatory statutory procedure by sending any notice pertaining to the existing rate of house tax and/or adopting the earlier house tax for a preceding year and neither any opportunity of filing any objections was given to the plaintiff regarding the increase in the annual value nor any opportunity of hearing was afforded before the assessment order was passed and even no speaking order was passed by any competent authority before levying any tax on the plaintiff. All of a sudden on 16.12.1998, the defendant brought the Assistant Collector IInd Grade with a warrant of attachment inter alia contending that a sum of Rs. 8,76,430/- was allegedly due as house tax.;