Ahmedabad Municipal Corp. vs R.K. Shah and Associates

C.K. Buch, J.—This group of First Appeals are filed by Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation through the Municipal Commissioner against the respondent, whereby the appellant Municipal Corporation has challenged the judgment and order passed by the Presiding Judge of Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad in four different Municipal Valuation Appeals bearing Nos. 1756 of 1996, 1971 of 1996, 401 3367 of 1997 and 303 of 1997 respectively. The respondent had preferred appeals before the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, challenging the legality and validity of fixation of GRV of the premises occupied by the respondent. Reliance was placed on an earlier judgment of Small Causes Court rendered in earlier Municipal Valuation Appeals. The learned Judge, Small Causes Court, decided to calculate the GRV on the strength of the percentage on the value of the premises. The learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad held that the GRV of the premises is fixed at Rs. 9,744/-, Rs. 10,500/- Rs. 9,940/-and Rs. 8,470/- respectively and the excess of tax, if recovered, be refunded to the respondent by the Municipal Corporation.

Mr. Nagarkar, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant- Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, has submitted that the finding under challenge by present First Appeals is not sustainable because while fixing the annual letting value for the purpose of property tax assessment the criteria adopted by the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court is not legal. According to Mr. Nagarkar, the order under challenge and the appeals preferred by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation can be dealt with by saying that the dispute is covered by the decision of this Court in A''Bad Municipal Corporation Vs. Dena Bank, . Mr. Nagarkar has taken us through the Head Note (D) in para 18 of the judgment. The judgment under challenge is a short judgment. It emerges clearly that the formula of 7% adopted by the learned Judge of Small Causes Court is without application of mind. It is not necessary to reproduce the entire paragraph 18 of the judgment relied on by Mr. Nagarkar. It is possible for this Court to observe that the observations made and finding recorded by this Court in the above cited decision takes care of the contingency placed by the Municipal Corporation in the present appeals. It is rightly submitted by Mr. Nagarkar that by the above cited judgment this Court decided a number of appeals and remanded all the matters to the Small Causes Court issuing direction to reconsider the legitimacy of the GRV decided by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation in light of the discussions made in the judgment. At that relevant point of time the present group of appeals were left out. Otherwise this group of appeals could have also been decided along with the appeals disposed of by the above cited decision.

On careful scrutiny of various number of appeals decided by the Division Bench of this Court, we are in agreement with the say of Mr. Nagarkar. The judgment and order under challenge in these appeals therefore requires to be quashed and the matters are required to be remanded to the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad to hear and decide them afresh keeping in mind the direction given by this Court in the above cited decision in Dena Bank (supra) and allied appeals.

In an earlier judgment of this Court in Municipal Corporation of the City of Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad Vs. Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd., also would also help the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation more particularly the observations made by the Court in paragraph 62 of the judgment because this Court ultimately has held in the group of matters decided by the second judgment that the orders of Small causes Court are required to be set aside and the case be remanded to the Small causes Court, Ahmedabad with a direction to decide the matters de-novo for fresh fixation of ratable value in light of the observations made in the judgment.

Nobody has appeared for the other side. It can be inferred that the respondent might have accepted the issue involved in these matters because of the above cited two decisions. According to us, there is no need to enter into any further discussion.

Therefore, the judgment and order under challenge in all the four appeals are hereby quashed and set aside. The cases are remanded to the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad to hear an decide the appeals de-novo in light of the discussions made by this Court in above referred to two decisions.

Before parting with the judgment, we are inclined to observe that the learned Presiding Judge of the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, if, has decided the value of the cost of construction then proper and cogent evidence admissible in the eye of law only be considered while arriving at the finding qua the correct GRV.

All the four appeals are accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. Order and direction accordingly.