[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Bunninder Deep Singh Falak vs New Delhi Municipal Council on 15 April, 2026
Author: Amit Bansal
Bench: Amit Bansal
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 15th April, 2026
+ W.P.(C) 2963/2023, CM APPL. 11554/2023 & CM APPL.
23139/2024
BUNNINDER DEEP SINGH FALAK .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Aditya N. Prasad, Mr. Piyush
Sharma and Mr. Pratyush Jain,
Advocates
versus
NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Sriharsha Peechara, SC with Mr.
Soumit Ganguli and Mr. Akash
Sharma, Advs. for NDMC
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
AMIT BANSAL, J. (ORAL)
1. Since 14th April, 2026 was declared a Court holiday, the matters listed
on 14th April, 2026 are being taken up today, i.e. 15th April, 2026.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking setting aside of the
judgment dated 20th September, 2022 passed by the Additional District
Judge-02, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in HTA 78/2017, dismissing the
appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 115 of the New Delhi Municipal
Council Act, 1994 (hereinafter 'NDMC Act').
3. The aforesaid appeal was filed assailing the assessment order dated 6th
December, 2016. In terms of the said assessment order, the late mother of
the petitioner had been directed to pay property tax to the tune of Rs.
14,58,285/- in respect of Flat/property located at C-5 Marble Arch, Prithvi
Raj Road, New Delhi (hereinafter the 'subject property').
4. A notice dated 19th February, 2004 under Section 72 of the NDMC
Act was issued by the respondent/NDMC to the late mother of the petitioner,
which was replied by the petitioner's mother vide letter dated 16th March,
2004. Thereafter, the petitioner did not receive any communication from the
respondent/NDMC.
5. In February 2017, the petitioner came to know that an assessment
order has been passed by the respondent/NDMC on 6th December, 2016 and
a demand of Rs. 14,58,285/- was raised.
6. The petitioner filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 2839 of 2017
assailing the order dated 6th December, 2016, which was dismissed vide
order dated 12th May, 2017 and the petitioner was granted liberty to pursue
the alternate remedy of filing an appeal under Section 115 of the NDMC
Act.
7. Accordingly, an appeal was preferred by the petitioner on 21st July,
2017, which was dismissed vide the impugned judgement on the ground that
the impugned assessment order has been passed after taking into
consideration all the objections raised by the appellant/petitioner. Further,
the contention of the petitioner that there was time gap between the issuance
of notice under Section 72 of the NDMC Act and passing of impugned
assessment order, was not accepted as the NDMC Act does not prescribe
any period of limitation to act upon such notice and revision of rateable
value.
8. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
9. Counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Division
Bench in Ved Marwah v. New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and
Ors., 2018 SCC OnLine Del 8096.
10. In Ved Marwah (supra), the notices under Section 72 of the NDMC
Act were issued as far back as 11th February, 2002 and the assessment order
was passed on 31st October, 2017. The contention of the petitioner in Ved
Marwah (supra) was noted in paragraph 5 of the judgment, which is set out
below:
"5. All the petitioners complain that the completion of assessment
proceeding or the revision of the assessment lists, after an inordinate
period renders the exercise of power unreasonable. It is urged that the
assessing officers do not have the power to adjudicate upon issues that
are in fact stale or conclude proceedings after an inordinate delay in
such a way as to result in manifold liability on the part of the property
owners which they would be unprepared to bear. According to the
petitioners, the assessments pursuant to any given notice - either
proposing a first-time assessment of any property or revision of the
existing rateable value is to be completed within a reasonable period of
not more than 3 years failing which the NDMC ceases to have any
power to adjudicate upon such notices which should be considered
stale.
[Emphasis supplied]
11. After discussing various precedents, the Division Bench in Ved
Marwah (supra) quashed the assessment order on the ground that it was
passed after an inordinate delay of 12 years and it was held that the
finalization of assessment list or its revision would result in an unreasonable
and arbitrary exercise of power. The relevant observations of the Division
Bench are set out below:
15. In the present case, the finalization of assessment list or its revision,
after over 12 years in all the cases, cannot be countenanced. It is
clearly unreasonable and arbitrary and calls for interference.
xxxx xxxx xxxx
18. In view of the above reasoning, it is held the impugned final orders
of assessment and the demands issued are clearly unreasonable and
void. They are hereby quashed. Consequently, it is held that the NDMC
is at liberty to rework the assessments in respect of the properties that
are the subject matter of these proceedings, by issuing fresh notices for
the periods commencing from 3 years prior to the date on which the
final notices were issued, and finalize the assessments within
reasonable time. In the event of grievance on the part of the assessee to
such fresh assessment orders, it is open to them to approach the
appellate tribunal; provided they deposit the amount towards the tax
liability for the base year."
[Emphasis supplied]
12. The SLP filed by NDMC against Ved Marwah (supra) was dismissed
by the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 025398/2018 vide order 1st August,
2023.
13. The judgment in Ved Marwah (supra) was followed by a Coordinate
Bench by this Court on 7th August, 2025 in CM(M) 255/2023 titled as Bela
Dalmia & Anr. v. New Delhi Municipal Council. The facts of the Bela
Dalmia (supra) are similar to the facts of the present case. In Bela Dalmia
(supra), notice under Section 72 of the NDMC Act was issued on 25th
February, 2002 and the assessment order was passed on 12th January, 2016,
after a delay of 14 years. Relying upon Ved Marwah (supra), the Coordinate
Bench quashed the said assessment order dated 12th January, 2016.
14. In the present case also, notice under Section 72 of the NDMC Act
was issued to the petitioner on 19th February, 2004 which was duly replied
by the petitioner on 16th March, 2004. Thereafter, the assessment order was
passed, after an inordinate delay of almost 12 years, on 6th December, 2016.
From the record, it is evident that the aforesaid delay is solely attributable to
NDMC.
15. Therefore, the dicta of Ved Marwah (supra) is squarely applicable in
the present case. The impugned order fails to take into account the judgment
of the Division Bench in Ved Marwah (supra) and is hence erroneous.
Accordingly, the impugned judgment dated 20th September, 2022 is set
aside.
16. Consequently, the impugned assessment order and the property tax
bill(s) issued consequent thereto, are hereby quashed.
17. After giving due opportunity to the petitioners, NDMC would be at
liberty to rework the assessment by issuing fresh notices for the period
commencing from three (3) years prior to the date on which the assessment
order was passed and finalise the assessment in an expeditious manner.
18. The writ petition along with pending application(s) is disposed of.
AMIT BANSAL, J
APRIL 15, 2026
ds
