KOOTHANALLUR TOWN PANCHAYAT BOARD Vs. MARIAM BEEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant in O. S. No. 477 of 1972, on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Mannargudi, is the appellant herein. The respondent plaintiff filed the suit for a declaration that the assessment of Rs. 1418-31 levied by the defendant for the building bearing door No. 4 Hospital Road, Koothanallur, is illegal and as a consequential relief for directing the defendant to refund the excess amount of Rs. 818-31, collected by the defendant with costs of suit.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff is as follows. The plaintiff is the owner of the building called 'Jabbar Talkies' bearing door No. 4 Hospital Road, Koothanallur. The building is a recent construction and it was completed in the year 1971, after a very long time. The defendant Panchayat Board assessed the building to property tax of Rs. 2362-85 including the library cess of Rs. 68-85 and issued a special notice of house-tax, new assessment which was served on the plaintiff on 17-7-1971 for the year 1971-72. On receipt of the notice, the plaintiff preferred a revision petition on 8-8-1971, to the Executive Officer, alleging that the proposed assessment was excessive and far in excess of the rental value of the building and that it should be revised. The Executive Officer reduced the tax on the revision petition to only Rs. 1418-31. The revised tax is also illegal and is far in excess of the actual rental value of the property. The Panchayat Board, in its resolution, dt. 30-10-1971, arbitrarily and without assigning any reasons confirmed the tax of Rs. 1418-31 and rejected the appeal preferred by the plaintiff. The cost of construction of the building was only Rs. 70,000. So the tax has to be imposed only on the rental value. The tax on similar building at Kodavasal and Koradacheri was not more than Rs. 412 per year. The annual rental value of the building can never exceed Rs. 600. Therefore, the plaintiff instituted the suit for the reliefs mentioned above.

(3.) On the other hand, the case of the defendant Panchayat Board as contended in the written statement is as follows : The defendant Panchayat Board assessed the suit building to property tax of Rs. 2363-85 including library cess of Rs. 68-85 for the year 1971-72. It is true that the plaintiff filed a revision petition for reduction of property tax. The defendant took into account all the aspects of the problem and after due verification of the suit building and the site on which it is constructed, fixed the capital value of the suit properly as Rs. 1,50,000, and the property tax was assessed at Rs. 1377 and the library cess was fixed at Rs. 41-31. Thus the total property tax for the suit property was fixed in Revision Petition No. 1 of 1971-72 at Rs. 1418-31, per annum. The plaintiff preferred an appeal against the assessment by the Executive Officer to the President in council of the defendant Panchayat. The defendant-Panchayat Board, after thoroughly examining the appeal confirmed the assessment of the property tax for the suit property. It is not true to say that the annual rental value of the suit property cannot exceed Rs. 600) per year and that the cost of construction of the building was only Rs. 70,000. The defendant Panchayat Board and its Executive Officer have correctly valued the suit property at Rs. 1,50,000. The rental value at the rate of 6% has been arrived at Rs. 9000 per year. A depreciation amount of Rs. 900 arrived at the rate of 10% has been deducted from the rental value. Thus, the property tax has been calculated at the rate of 17% p.a., on Rs. 8100 and arrived at Rs. 1377. The library cess of three paise per rupee has been assessed and fixed at Rs. 41.31. Thus, the total property tax has been assessed for the suit building and fixed at Rs. 1418.31 p.a. The plaintiff has not chosen to avail himself of the opportunity of appeal before the proper forum. The Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit.