HEMANT GUPTA, J. - (1.) THE plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the learned first Appellate Court whereby its suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from recovering the house tax in respect of the assessment year 1999-2000 was dismissed.
(2.) IT is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff is paying house tax since the year 1983-84. In the year 1984-85, house tax was increased to Rs. 12250/- but in the years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 the plaintiff has received the bill dated 25.3.2001 claiming house tax at the rate of Rs. 81,758,90 for each year. It was alleged that the said increase in the house tax is without any show cause notice or providing any opportunity of hearing and without providing any opportunity to file objections to the proposed assessment. The stand of the defendant was that show cause notice dated 30.10.1998 was issued to the plaintiff determining the annual rental value at Rs. 9,96,077/- which was received by the representative of the plaintiff on 25.11.1998. After receiving the objection against the said show cause notice, the assessment was reduced to Rs. 8,17,860/- per annum and the bill claiming house tax was accordingly raised. The learned trial Court held that there is nothing on the record that any notice of one month was ever issued upon the plaintiff as required under Section 99 of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act") before proposing to make the amendment in the assessment list. It was found that public notice was not given and the assessment list is required to be authenticated by not less than two members of the Committee and that the order in non-speaking. It was held that the defendant has not produced even a single document to indicate the reason for increase in the house tax abruptly. However, the learned first Appellate Court reversed the findings recorded by the learned trial Court. Exhibit D4 is the notice given by the defendant to the plaintiff. Exhibit D5 is the objections submitted by the plaintiff and Exhibit D6 is the proforma of assessment of house tax. Exhibit D-9 is the office order regarding the house tax assessment passed by the Commissioner. Exhibit D-10 is the direction qua the assessment of the house tax. Thus, it was found that the remedy of the plaintiff is to seek remedy under the Act and the plaintiff cannot avail the remedy of the present suit.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that the assessment was framed without any notice to the plaintiff, therefore, the plaintiff has a right to challenge the levy of house tax as such levy in violation of the procedure contemplated under the Act cannot be called as levy under the Act. Reliance is placed upon Municipal Committee, Bhatinda v. Krishan Lal and another, 1986 RRR 330 (SC) : 1986 P.L.J. 651 and Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana v. M/s Ram Parkash Kidar Nath, 1988(2) R.R.R. 314 : 1988(1) RRR 534 : (1988-2)94 P.L.R. 219. However, I do not find any substance in the argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant. From the records produced by the appellant, it is apparent that Exhibit D-4 is the notice calling upon the plaintiff to file objections in respect of the rateable value within a period one month of the notice. The said notice has been received by Kali Charan on 25.11.1998. Exhibit D-5 is the objections submitted on behalf of the plaintiff whereas proforma for tax is Exhibit D-6. In view of the said documents, it is apparent that house tax was claimed from the plaintiff after issuing show cause notice and in terms of the statutory provisions. Section 141 of the Act provides that no objection shall be taken to any valuation or assessment, nor shall the liability of any person to be assessed or taxed be qestioned in any other manner or by any other authority otherwise than as provided in this Act. Section 141 of the Act reads as under : "141. Taxation not to be questioned except under this Act : (1) No objection shall be taken to any valuation or assessment, nor shall the liability of any person to be assessed or taxed be questioned in any other manner or by any other authority otherwise than as provided in this Act. (2) No refund of any tax shall be claimable by any person otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder." ;