Gujarat High Court
The Ahmedabad Municipal ... vs Pragnaben Virendrabhai Acharya on 12 March, 2021
Bench: R.M.Chhaya
C/FA/1924/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1924 of 2020
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2019
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1924 of 2020
=============================================
THE AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF CITY OF AHMEDABAD
Versus
PRAGNABEN VIRENDRABHAI ACHARYA
=============================================
Appearance:
CHINTAN K GANDHI(8600) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ADITYA B MAHADEVIA(10529) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
RAVAL AND TRIVEDI ASSOCIATES(9262) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR KUNAL P VAISHNAV(5111) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA
Date : 12/03/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA)
Heard Mr. Gaurang Vaghela, learned advocate for Raval and
Trivedi Associates for the appellant and Mr. Kunal P Vaishnav,
learned advocate for the respondent.
By way of this appeal under Section 411 of the Gujarat
Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 , the appellant
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation has challenged the judgment
and order dated 5.4.2019 passed by the learned Small Cause Court,
Ahmedabad in Municipal Valuation Appeal No. 04 of 2018.
The appeal pertains to property bearing Municipal Tenement
No.03202721750002G situated at Ward Lambha Narol,
Ahmedabad. It appears from the record that the respondent has
constructed shed of iron sheets like showroom admeasuring about
1080 sq ft. The appellant Corporation assessed the annual tax for
C/FA/1924/2020 ORDER
the year 2013 at Rs.70214/ and thereafter for the year 201314 to
201516 at Rs.1,79,826/ and thereafter Rs.1,47,964/ for the year
201617 and Rs.1,46,542/ for the year 201718. The said
assessment came to be challenged by the respondent in the appeal.
Upon bare perusal of the judgment and order impugned in
this appeal the same indicates that the learned Small Cause Court
while dealing with the appeal, more particularly, in para 4 of the
impugned judgment and order has discussed the evidence on
record but has not given any reasons for conclusion arrivied, at for
partly allowing the appeal.
Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties
and on perusal of the impugned judgment and order as well as
relevant papers supplied by the learned advocates for the respective
parties for perusal of this Court, we deem it fit to quash and set
aside the impugned judgment and order and remit back the
proceedings of Municipal Valuation Appeal No.04 of 2018 to the
Small Cause Court, Ahmedabad for its rehearing and passing of
afresh order with reasons. The Small Cause Court shall consider the
submission of both the sides and pass afresh order in accordance
with law and on its own merits.
Mr.Kunal Vaishnav, learned advocate for the respondent
original appellant does not invite any reason for the view taken by
this Court. The learned Small Cause Court shall rehear the parties
and decide the denovo as directed in accordance with law and on
its own merits without in any way being influenced by the
impugned order. Present appeal stands allowed accordingly. As
the appeal is disposed of Civil Application does not survive and
same stands disposed of. The learned Small Cause Court shall
C/FA/1924/2020 ORDER
preferably decide the remanded proceedings within a period of 8
months from the date of receipt of the present order.
(R.M.CHHAYA, J)
(R.P.DHOLARIA, J)
KAUSHIK J. RATHOD
