Municipal Corpn. of Ahmedabad vs Swami Bhagwatacharya Educationtrust

A.M. Kapadia, J.—Challenge in this Appeal filed u/s 411 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (`BPMC Act'' for short) is to the correctness of the judgment and order dated 26.12.1989, rendered in Municipal Valuation Appeal No. 12401 of 1987 by the learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, by which the Municipal Valuation Appeal, filed by the respondent u/s 406 of the Act, has been partly allowed and thereby the Gross Rateable Value ("GRV" for short) was fixed at Rs. 43,392/ - for both the amalgamated units, for the Assessment Year 1987-88.

Mr. Bhaskar P. Tanna, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant-Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, submitted that the order which is impugned in the Appeal is cryptic order without assigning any reasons and, therefore, the same is required to be quashed and set aside and Municipal Valuation Appeal No. 12401 of 1987 be restored and remanded to the files of the learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, for deciding the same afresh, after giving ample opportunity of leading the evidence to both the parties strictly in accordance with law.

Mr. K.V. Shelat, learned Advocate for the respondent submitted that the order impugned in the Appeal is not cryptic order. The learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, has assigned reasons and fixed the GRV at Rs. 33,792/ - for Unit No. 1, admeasuring 2,500 sq. meters, bearing Survey No. 27/2 whereas fixed the GRV at Rs. 54,000/ - for Unit No. 2, admeasuring 400 sq. meters, bearing Survey No. 27/2/1. It is submitted that the Unit No. 2 was initially let out and, therefore, the respondent has filed Appeal in relation to the Unit No. 2 only and not in relation to the Unit No. 1. It is, therefore, submitted that, if this Court is desirous of remanding the matter, then, may clarify that the learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, shall decide the GRV with respect to the Unit No. 2 only. He, therefore, urged to pass an appropriate order.

We have considered the submissions advanced by Mr. Bhaskar Tanna, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and Mr. K.V. Shelat, learned Advocate for the respondent. We have also perused the impugned order. Upon perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that the learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, has fixed the GRV at Rs. 43,392/ - for both the amalgamated units for the Assessment Year 1987-88. Therefore, while remanding the matter, we cannot direct the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, shall decide the GRV afresh for the Unit No. 2 only. Since the Municipal Valuation Appeal No. 12401 of 1987 was filed for both the amalgamated units, it would be open for the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, to decide the issue raised in this Appeal in connection with the property in question.

For the foregoing reasons, the Appeal succeeds and accordingly it is allowed. The order impugned in the Appeal is quashed and set aside. The Municipal Valuation Appeal No. 12401 of 1987 is restored and remanded to the files of the learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, for deciding the same afresh after giving ample opportunity of leading the evidence to both the parties strictly in accordance with law and also considering the averments made in the appeal memo, by assigning reasons. No order as to costs.

In view of the order passed in the First Appeal, Civil Application praying for stay of the impugned order in First Appeal, does not survive and is disposed of accordingly.