Snr Construction Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs The Kolkata Municipal ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1705 Cal

   D/L
Item No. 7
15.03.2023
 KOLE
                               MAT 243 of 2023
                                    With
                             IA No. CAN 1 of 2023
                                    With
                             IA No. CAN 2 of 2023

                     SNR Construction Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
                                 -Vs.-
                 The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors.


             Mr. Arindam Banerjee,
             Mr. Arpita Saha,
                                                        ... for the appellants.

             Mr. Biswajit Mukherjee,
             Ms. P. Sengupta,
                                                               ... for the KMC.


                                  In Re: CAN 1 of 2023:

                     This is an application for condonation of delay of

              about 347 days in filing the appeal.

                     Causes shown being sufficient, the delay is condoned.

                     CAN 1 of 2023 is, thus, disposed of.

                     IN Re: MAT 243 of 2023 with CAN 2 of 2023:

                     By consent of the parties the appeal and the

              application are taken up for hearing together.

                     This appeal is directed against a judgment and order

              dated January 12, 2021, whereby the appellants' writ petition

              being WPA 2543 of 2020 was disposed of by a learned Single

              Judge with certain directions.

                     The   appellants/writ     petitioners   approached   the

              learned Single Judge challenging a letter of intimation which

              was issued on the basis of enhancement of valuation of the

              concerned property by the Hearing Officer. Before filing the

              writ petition, the petitioners had preferred three appeals
                               2




before the Municipal Assessment Tribunal challenging the

enhancement.       During the pendency of the appeals, the

letter of intimation was served on the petitioners who

accordingly    approached    the    learned       Single    Judge

challenging the same.     The learned Judge disposed of the

writ petition with the following observations:-

                 "The petitioners submit that in spite of the
                aforesaid appeals being pending before the
                Assessment      Tribunal,    the     Kolkata
                Municipal Corporation has issued the notice
                for immediate payment of outstanding
                dues.

                The Municipal Assessment Tribunal is the
                appropriate authority to decide whether the
                annual valuation of the property in
                question has been properly fixed or not.

                As it appears that the appeals preferred by
                the petitioners are pending consideration
                before the Assessment Tribunal for a
                considerable period of time, the instant writ
                petition is disposed of by directing the
                Kolkata Municipal Assessment Tribunal to
                take appropriate steps for consideration of
                the aforesaid appeals, in accordance with
                law, at the earliest, but positively within a
                period of four months from the date of
                communication of a copy of this order."



      Being aggrieved the writ petitioners have come up by

way of this appeal.

      Appearing for the appellants Mr. Banerjee, learned

Advocate, submits that the orders of the Hearing Officer

were never made available to the appellants.               This is

seriously disputed by Mr. Mukherjee, learned Advocate for

the Corporation.

      Mr. Banerjee says that since the appellants do not

have copies of the orders which have been assailed before the

Tribunal in the three appeals, the orders could not be filed
                                3




along with the appeal and therefore, in the eye of law, the

appeals are non-est.

       Mr. Mukherjee, learned Advocate points out that the

appellants in the three Tribunal appeals have not made the

requisite pre-deposit in accordance with Section 189 (6) of

the KMC Act, 1980.

       We are of the view that the appeals filed before the

Tribunal should be decided on merits. The appellants shall

make the requisite pre-deposit within four weeks from date.

       Mr. Mukherjee, learned Advocate for the Corporation

has graciously made over copies of the orders of the Hearing

Officer which have been assailed in the three appeals before

the Municipal Assessment Tribunal, although he says that

copies of such orders had already been made over to the

appellants.       Mr. Banerjee, learned Advocate for the

appellants accepts copies of such orders from Mr. Mukherjee

with gratitude.

       The appellants shall file copies of the orders assailed

before the Municipal Assessment Tribunal within four weeks

from date. Upon the pre-deposit being made and copies of

the orders being filed, the Municipal Assessment Tribunal

shall decide the three appeals on merits, in accordance with

law, observing the principles of natural justice. It is expected

that the appeals will be disposed of within a period of three

months from the date of communication of this order to the

learned Tribunal. All points are left open for the Tribunal to

decide. We have not gone into the merits of the contentions

of the respective parties.
                                 4




       Since we have not called for affidavits, the allegations

made in the stay application, are deemed not to be admitted

by the respondents.

The appeal and the connected application are,

accordingly, disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be

supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

(Apurba Sinha Ray, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)