Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Medinet Services Pvt. Limited & ... vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 3 January, 2023
W.P.A. 37378 of 2013
510 . 03.01.2023
bd. Ct.15
Medinet Services Pvt. Limited & Anr.
-vs-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Joydeep Kar
Mr. Arindam Banerjee
Mr. Anirban Guin
... for the petitioners.
Mr. Jaharlal De
Ms. Anjusri Mukherjee
... for the State.
Mr. Biswajit Mukherjee
Mr. S.K. Debnath
... For the KMC.
Mr. Satyajit Talukdar
... for the KMDA.
The matter is heard to some length.
Mr. Kar, learned senior advocate appears on
behalf of the petitioners, KMC as well as KMDA and
the State respondents are represented by learned
advocates.
The issue involved in this writ petition hinges
on the point whether the property tax is to be
assessed in terms of section 176 of the Kolkata
Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 or it is to be
assessed under section 174 of the said act of 1980.
Petitioners claim on the strength of the lease deed
dated 29th April, 2013 that though the land in
question has been leased out in favour of the
petitioners for 99 years but it is to be construed
that KMDA is the owner of the land in question
therefore according to the petitioners section 176
read with section 171(8) of the said Act of 1980 will
apply in assessing the property tax.
On behalf of the petitioners reliance has been
placed on the judgment reported in 2016 (3) CHN
(CAL) 590 (Kolkata Municipal Corporation -vs-
Fabworth Promoters Pvt. Ltd.). On perusal of the
said judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench it
appears that the issue has already been succinctly
decided by the Hon'ble Division Bench that even in
the case of execution of lease deed in favour of the
lessee for a period of 99 years in the matter of
assessment of property tax the provision as
contained in section 176 read with section 171(8)
shall apply.
It has been submitted on behalf of the
petitioners that necessary order be passed for
taking steps for mutation of the land in question
and subsequently to process the application for
grant of sanctioned plan based on payment of
property tax as per the assessment made in terms
of section 176 read with section 171(8) of the said
Act of 1980. However, in the same breath it has
been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that if
necessary and if ultimately Court decides against
the petitioners on the issue of assessment of
property tax as raised in this writ petition,
petitioners are agreeable to pay the property tax to
be assessed otherwise.
Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate, representing
the KMC submits that the judgment of the Hon'ble
Divison Bench rendered in Fabworth Promoters
Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has been assailed before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court and next date fixed for
hearing of the appeal is 13th January, 2023.
Therefore according to the KMC in view of pendency
of the appeal before the Apex Court the issue is not
yet settled and the issue involved in this writ
petition will depend upon the outcome of the
pending appeal before the Supreme Court.
In view of aforesaid submissions being made
on behalf of the respective parties, let the writ
petition be listed on 7th February, 2023 under the
heading "Hearing (Group-V)".
Petitioners are directed to submit an
undertaking in the form of an affidavit to the extent
that in the event mutation is made on payment of
property tax as per section 176 read with section
171(8) and thereby permitting them to take steps for
making application before the concerned authority
of KMC for grant of sanctioned plan and ultimately
if the writ petition is decided against the petitioners
they are agreeable to pay the property tax as
assessed by the KMC.
Such affidavit is to be affirmed before the next
date of hearing with an advance copy upon the
learned advocates representing the respondents.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)
