BRIHANMUMBAI MAHANAGARPALIKA Vs. ARVIND NEMCHAND VAKILWALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the appellants thereby challenging the judgment and order passed by the Court of Small Causes at Mumbai in Municipal Appeal No. 311 of 2002 on 26th October, 2007.

(2.) The original appellants/respondents herein are the owners of the property described in paragraph 1 of the Memo of Appeal filed before the Court of Small Causes. It is the case of the respondents herein that they have paid the property taxes as per the bills received from the Municipal Corporation, Greater Bombay from time to time and they have paid last tax bill for the period ending 31st March, 2002. It is further case of the respondents that they received a letter dated 4th March, 2002 addressed to Ratanchand Nemchand Vakilwala and others from the original respondents/appellants at their residential address. It was mentioned in the said letter that special notices under sections 162(2) and 167 of M.M.C. Act have been pasted on the property of the respondents on 4th March, 2002 and rateable value of the property involved in the appeal is fixed at the rate of Rs.17,940/ n.p.a. w.e.f. 1st April, 2001. It was stated in the said letter that if the original appellants wish to complain against the increase in rateable value they can do so in writing within 15 days from the date of pasting under Section 163 of the said Act. It is further case of the respondents that they received the said letter in the second week of March, 2002 and by their advocate's letter dated 15th March, 2002 they informed the Assessing Authority of the Municipal Corportion that Ratanchand Nemchand Vakilwala expired in or about 1987 and the Corporation cannot increase the rateable value without any material and reasons.

(3.) It is further case of the respondents that they received two amended bills of property taxes for the period from 1st April, 2001 to 30th September, 2001 and 1st October, 2001 to 31st March, 2002 both dated 11th March, 2002 showing the increase in the rateable value of the property involved in the appeal and the respondents were called upon to pay the difference of the tax amount for the said period. The respondents herein vide letter dated 21st march, 2002 informed the respondents that they received the said two bills on 18th March, 2002 after the rateable value of the property involved in the appeal has been increased by them. They also informed the Corporation by their letter that the Assessing Authority of the Municipal Corporation pasted the requisite notice on the property involved in the appeal though they were aware about the residential address of the respondents. It is their contention that they have not received the notice under sections 162(2) and 167 of M.M.C. Act and therefore the rateable value at the rate of Rs.17,940/ n.p.a. w.e.f. 1st April, 2001 and the bills issued on the basis of the said rateable value is illegal and invalid.