Delhi High Court
B.L.Gupta (Deceased) Through Lrs vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 12 December, 2014
Author: Sunil Gaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: December 12, 2014
+ RSA No.72/2012
B.L.GUPTA (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. Virender Kumar Sharma,
Advocate
versus
MUNCIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Mini Pushkarna, Standing
counsel for MCD (South)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
The question of law which arises in this second appeal, as noticed
in the order of 5th March, 2013 is as under:-
„Whether the notice issued under Section 126 of DMC
Act on 30th March, 1977 for assessment of the house tax for the
year 1.4.1976-31.3.1977, admittedly received by the assessee
after 31st March, 1977, can be termed to be a legal and valid
notice for the purpose of assessment?‟
Appellant's suit for injunction to restrain respondent from
refraining to assess the property tax in pursuance to Notice of 30th March,
1977 has been held to be barred by Section 169 r/w Section 477 of Delhi
Municipal Corporation Act, 1957.
RSA No.72/2012 Page 1
At the hearing of this appeal, learned counsel for appellant has
placed reliance upon a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in LPA
No. 228/2008, J.K. Chaudhary Charitable & Educational Trust Vs.
MCD, rendered on 31st March, 2014 whereby respondent-MCD was
restrained from recovering the house tax till the case of Dharma
Properties is decided by the Apex Court. The operative portion of
Division Bench decision of this Court in J.K. Chaudhary (Supra) is as
under:-
"4. Since the writ petition filed by the appellant has
been dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court and the
appellant has the benefit of an interim order in its favour, we
dispose of the appeal in terms of the order dated May 27, 2011
passed in LPA No. 186/2008, LPA No. 526/2003, LPA No.
576/2003 and LPA No. 184/2008 observing that if the decision
of the Division Bench of this Court in Dharma Properties‟ case
(supra) is upheld by the Supreme Court the demand impugned
in the writ petition filed by the appellant shall be quashed, but if
the decision in Dharma Properties‟ case is reversed the writ
petition filed by the appellant shall be treated as having been
dismissed.
5. Till the Supreme Court decides on the subject the
respondent shall not effect recovery of the house tax from the
appellant which was challenged in the writ petition filed."
Learned counsel for parties submit that this appeal deserve to be
disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order of 31st March, 2014.
RSA No.72/2012 Page 2
In view of aforesaid, this appeal is disposed of in terms of decision
of Division Bench in J.K. Chaudhary (Supra). Needless to say that fate of
impugned Notice of 30th March, 1997 would be governed by decision of
Apex Court in Dharma Properties (Supra) and till then, respondent shall
not act upon the impugned Notice.
With aforesaid observations, this appeal is disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
DECEMBER 12, 2014
r
RSA No.72/2012 Page 3
