CORPORATION OF CALCUTTA Vs. BHIMCHANDRA MODAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On an appeal by the owner of premises No. P. 3 of the Calcutta Improvement Trust Scheme LIII against the assessment of the annual value of the said premises at Rs. 3,412 in a revaluation to be effective from August 3, 1951-52 the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court, Calcutta, has reduced the valuation to Rs. 2,187. The present appeal is by the Corporation of Calcutta against this reduced assessment by the appellate Judge.

(2.) The site of the premises admittedly covers an area of 1,085 square feet. It is equally admitted that in the front portion of the site there were at the date of the assessment four rooms, the construction of which was complete and which were being actually let out, to tenants. The sanctioned plan for the building shows that in addition to these four rooms, there was provision for another room contiguous north of the easternmost of these four looms while on the north-west portion of the site there is provision, according to this plan, for a staircase to the upper floor and also one bath room and privy. The plan shows provision for open space, on the north, east and west of the building, of the width of four feet. There is provision also for an inner open verandah lying east, west and north of the structure mentioned above. What would remain vacant land still is shown as courtyard. The assessment by the Corporation authorities was made on the basis of gross receipts of Rs. 240 for the four roadside rooms at the rate of Rs. 60 per room per month and gross receipt at the rate of Rs. 1,080 a year for 12 chittaks of open land. The gross receipts for the four rooms being Rs. 2,880, the gross rental of this was calculated, after one deduction of ten per cent, on account of the occupier's share of the rent and another deduction of ten per cent, on the resulting figure under the provisions of Section 127(a) of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923, as Rs. 2,332, The gross receipt for the land being calculated at the rate of Rs. 1,080 as mentioned above, the total annual value, was assessed at Rs. 3,412.

(3.) The owner's objection against the assessment was two-fold. First his objection was that for the four roadside rooms the gross annual receipt should not have been calculated at Rs. 60 but at Rs. 50 per month. The second contention was that the entire ground floor having been constructed before the relevant date, there was no available vacant land which could fetch the sum of Rs. 1,080 per year or for the matter of that, any amount at all. The learned Judge of the Court of Small Causes was of the opinion that the gross annual receipts for the four roadside rooms could reasonably be calculated at the sum of Rs. 200 per month and not Rs. 240. He held further that the north-eastern room was also complete for all practical purposes but as it had no plastering and the door leaves had not been put in, it could be expected to fetch a gross rent of Rs. 25 per month only. He held further thai there was no such vacant land as could be expected to fetch any rent. On that basis, he calculated the annual value at Rs. 2,187.