Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
FA/5874/1995 6/ 6 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
FIRST
APPEAL No. 5874 of 1995
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================================
AHMEDABAD
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION - Appellant(s)
Versus
AHMEDABAD
DISTRICT CO OP MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
BHASKAR P.TANNA, SR.ADVOCATE WITH MR BHAVDUTT H.BHATT FOR TANNA
ASSOCIATES for
the Appellant.
MR BS PATEL for the
Respondent.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
Date
: 15/09/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA)
Challenge
in this Appeal filed under Section 411 of the Bombay Provincial
Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (‘BPMC Act’, for short) is to the
correctness of the judgment and order dated 30th April 1993 rendered
in Municipal Valuation Appeal No.26045/1991 by the learned Judge of
the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad by which the Municipal Valuation
Appeal filed by the respondent came to be allowed and thereby the
Gross Rateable Value fixed by the appellant at the rate of
Rs.92,136/- in respect of the premises bearing Final Plot
No.10/FP/144 (Tenement No.9929-0131-00-0001-R) of Ward Special
Property for the years 1990-91 and 1991-92 has been quashed.
Mr.Bhaskar
Tanna, learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that by
the impugned order the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court has
fixed ‘zero’ value of the premises in question, which is not
permissible in law.
To
buttress the aforesaid submission, Mr.Bhaskar Tanna, learned senior
counsel has pressed into service the reported decision of a Division
Bench of this Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of
Ahmedabad v/s. Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Limited
[1994(2) GLR 1498] and also the reported decision of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Assistant General Manager, Central
Bank of India and others v/s. Municipal Commissioner of the city of
Ahmedabad [1995(4) SCC 696]. He, therefore, submitted that the
impugned judgment and order deserves to be quashed and set-aside by
allowing this Appeal and thereby remanding the Municipal Valuation
Appeal to the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad for
deciding the same afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to both
the parties in accordance with law and in light of the aforesaid two
decisions.
We
have considered the submissions advanced by Mr.Bhaskar Tanna,
learned senior counsel for the appellant. We have perused the
impugned judgment and order, the decisions cited at the bar and so
also the records and proceedings of the Municipal Valuation Appeal
No.26045/1991.
In
the case of Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad (supra), in
paragraph 67 of the judgment, the Division Bench of this Court
has held as under:
It
would mean that even if the assessment is held to be not in
accordance with law, whether because of the wrong method followed
with regard to determining the rateable value or because of any
irregularity or illegality in procedure or because of violation of
the principles of natural justice or because notice under Rule 15(2)
had not been issued, then the Small Causes Court would itself have
the jurisdiction to examine evidence and determine the correct
rateable value. It would be wholly inappropriate for the Small
Causes Court to merely quash the assessment, which would have the
effect that for the official years in question, the entire tax would
be lost to the Corporation. In effect, the ratio decidendi of the
decision in Anant Mills case is that the Small Causes Court
exercises the same power and will have the same jurisdiction, which
is exercised by the Commissioner for the purposes of determining
what should be the correct rateable value.
The
judgment delivered by the Division Bench in the case of Municipal
Corporation of Ahmedabad (supra) has been carried in appeal before
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Assistant General
Manager, Central Bank of India (supra). The Hon’ble Supreme Court
has upheld the principles enunciated by this Court in the case of
Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad (supra). In sum and
substance, the finding of ‘zero’ assessment has not been approved by
this Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad
(supra), which has been affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the case of Assistant General Manager, Central Bank of India
(supra).
Seen
in the above context, the impugned judgment and order under appeal
deserves to be quashed and set-aside by restoring and remanding the
Municipal Valuation Appeal No.26045/1991 to the files of the learned
Small Causes Judge, Ahmedabad for deciding the same afresh after
giving ample opportunity of leading the evidence to both the parties
strictly in accordance with law.
For
the foregoing reasons, the Appeal succeeds and accordingly it is
allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 30th April 1993
passed by the learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad in
Municipal Valuation Appeal No.26045/1991 is quashed and set-aside.
The Municipal Valuation Appeal No.26045/1991 is restored and
remanded to the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad to be decided afresh
after giving ample opportunity of leading evidence to both the
parties in accordance with law. No order as to cost.
Registry
is directed to send the records
and proceedings to the Court below forthwith.
(A.M.Kapadia,
J.)
(J.C.Upadhyaya,
J.)
/moin
Top