K M C Vs. JOYEE LAHERI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

(2.) AFFIDAVIT filed by respondent No. 1, the purchaser of the property, ms. Joyee Laheri and affidavit filed by respondent Nos. 2 and 3, the erstwhile owners of the property affirmed through Sri Ranjit Chatterjee be kept with the record.

(3.) THE very short question involved in this appeal as filed assailing the judgment and order dated 21st July, 2008 passed in W. P. No. 1100 of 2007 by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation is that whether in terms of section 183 sub-section (5) proviso, the Corporation has the power to refuse mutation in a case where there is arrear of any dues to the corporation on account of the transfer or the predecessor-in-interest of the applicant praying for mutation. Learned trial Judge relying upon the judgment passed in the case "aniruddha Bose v. K. M. C. " reported in 2006 (2) CHN 535 held that under the said proviso of sub-section (5) of section 183 of said Act Corporation was bound to grant mutation and had no power to refuse it even if there was arrear of any property tax to the corporation for the concerned premises. In course of hearing however sellers and purchaser have agreed to clear the Corporation dues by snaring liability at the rate of 50% each and to that effect two affidavits have been filed with undertaking for payments of such. Those affidavits to be considered later on. To decide the question raised about the power of the corporation to refuse mutation in the event there is arrear of any dues to the Corporation, the relevant Section 183 will give the answer. Section 183 reads thus:-