RAIPUR MANUFACTURING CO LTD Vs. AHMEDABAD MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute between the plaintiff-appellant, the Raipoor Manufacturing Company, Ltd., at Ahmedabad, and the defendant respondent, the Municipality, is in respect of water-tax for 1923-24 which the latter sought to levy on the former. The appellant's objections to the tax have ultimately been reduced to three. Firstly, the bill presented to him is defective in law, and admittedly inaccurate as regards amount, and therefore until a proper bill is presented, the appellant is not liable. Secondly, under the Rules, particularly Rule 8 made under Section 46, Clause (1), this tax is payable only in advance in one instalment, and accrues due on April 1; he is not liable for any period before April 1, following the date when the tax first became due. Thirdly, the building on which the tax is leviable can only be buildings within a radius of 75 feet of a water pipe or 500 feet of a fire plug under Rule 22. Therefore, all the buildings outside these radii as shown in the plan are not liable merely because they are in the mill compound which belongs to the appellants.

(2.) The trial Court upheld the first two pleas, but not the last, and decreed the suit. The lower appellate Court rejected all three, and dismissed the suit. The plaintiff appeals.

(3.) The facts lie in a small compass. Under the Rules under Section 46(1) in Chapter XIII of Vol, 1 of the Ahmedabad Municipal Code, p. 159, under Rule I, Clause (1) "buildings" have the meaning in Section 3, Sub-section (7), of the Bombay District Municipal Act. Rule 2 makes buildings and lands within Municipal limits liable for the water tax. Rule 3 defines the time for paying the tax. Rule 4 provides for a proportionate charge for a water or drainage connection. Rule 6, Clause (b), defines the mode of assessing the taxes on mill and factory buildings. Rule 21 specifies the rate in accordance with the Schedule on the annual letting value the rate of the water tax. Rule 22 excepts from the water tax buildings or lands whereof no part is within 75 feet of a water pipe or within 500 feet of a fire plug, standpipe 0r water reservoir. It appears that the plaintiff Mill was outside Municipal limits until 1913. Some disputes arose subsequently in regard to water connection charges. It has now been held by both the Courts, and is not disputed in appeal, that by May 31, 1923, the Municipal pipes were brought within 75 feet of the Mill buildings, and there were two standpipes within 00 feet marked M, H, on the plan Exhibit 42, the radii being shown in red circles. The original bill presented by the respondent claimed the water tax from April 1, 1923, up to March 31, 1924, On Presentation of the bill, the plaintiffs objected, and filed the suit, and paid the amount under protest in Court. Before the evidence the respondents admitted that the appellants could not be charged for the months of April and May; the appellants withdrew that portion and the question is therefore reduced to the amount for ten months from June 1, 1923, to March 31, 1924. The original dispute covered a wider range, and raised a large number of questions, which have now been reduced to the three issues formulated at the outset of this judgment.