W S MAGDOOM MOHAMED Vs. ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE unsuccessful plaintiffs in O. S. No. 7653 of 1990 on the file of the IV-th Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai are the appellants in the above second appeal.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.

(3.) THE brief facts of the case of the plaintiffs are as follows:-The suit property belonging to the plaintiffs was assessed to property tax pursuant to the order of remand passed by the Taxation Appeals Committee and in accordance with the order dated 09. 03. 1982 passed in M. T. A. Nos. 14 and 15 of 1981 by the Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai. The second defendant fixed the annual value of the suit property at Rs. 2,98,116/- and at Rs. 3,38,520/- for the first and second half years of 1977-78 respectively. The second defendant had clearly stated in the assessment order that the basis for assessment was the fair rent arrived at, as per the provisions contained in The Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Rent Control Act ). While so, the first defendant issued a notice to the plaintiffs on 17. 07. 1990 under Rule-3 of Part 1-A of Schedule-IV of The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') enhancing the annual value of the property from Rs. 3,38,520/- to Rs. 10,09,554/- and proportionately increasing the half yearly tax from Rs. 38,929. 80 to Rs. 1,16,098. 80 and the library cess from Rs. 1,523. 35 to Rs. 4,543/- with effect from the second half year 1989-90 and the plaintiffs were asked to submit their objections if any and accordingly they submitted their objections on 26. 07. 1990. The plaintiffs objected to the enhancement on the ground that it is not open to the defendants to fix the fair rent once again for the very same building since Section 5 of the Rent Control Act operates as a clear bar. Overruling the objections the proposed enhancement was confirmed and a notice was issued under Rule 3-A of Part 1-A of Schedule-IV of the Act. Being aggrieved by that, the plaintiffs have filed the suit seeking a decree to declare the notice dated 07. 08. 1990 issued by the first defendant under Rule 3-A enhancing the annual value from Rs. 3,38,520/- to Rs. 10,09,554/- and assessing the property tax at Rs. 1,16,098. 70 and Library Cess at Rs. 4,543/- for the second half year 1989-90 in respect of the suit property as illegal, void and unenforceable in law and for a consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendants from demanding or collecting tax at the enhanced rate.