| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1989 SLG 2102 1989 SLD 2102 (1989) 175 ITR 301 |
Delhi High Court
D.P. WADHWA, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
D.P. WADHWA, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
S.K. Verma
v.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi*
Law:
Section:
Section 170 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 - Right to appeal - Conditions of - Whether an appeal under section 169 could not be entertained by District Court without there being deposit of property tax levied by assessing authority, and, thus, question of invoking rule 5 of Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, would not arise - Held, yes FACTS The Dy. Assessor and Collector assessed the rateable value of the property belonging to the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the assessment in appeal before the Addl. District Judge on the ground that the value of the land at the commencement of the construction had been wrongly fixed and that allowances for certain deductions had not been given. The Addl. District Judge directed him to deposit the property tax and made it a condition-precedent for issuing notice of appeal to the respondents. On writ, the petitioner contended that under rule 5 of Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court could grant stay of the order appealed against, on sufficient cause being shown, whether on conditions or without. HELD In Panch Shila Co-operative House Building Society Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi [C.W. No. 936 of 1975, dated 29-7-1975] a Division Bench of this Court held that an appeal which was not accompanied by the deposit of the amount, could not be entertained by the District Court. Now, if as per the decision in that case, the appeal could not be entertained without there being deposit of the amount, the question of invoking the provisions of rule 5, Order XLI, could not arise. Even if rule 5, Order XLI, was made applicable under section 457, section 170(b) would carve out an exception and in the case of appeals involving demands for deposit of tax, the amounts would have to be deposited before the appeal could be entertained. Hence, the writ petition of the petitioner was dismissed. CASES REFERRED TO Punj Sons (P.) Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi [1982] Rajdhani LR 247 (Delhi), S.C. Jain v.Union of India [1983] 143 ITR 607 (Delhi), Kewal Chopra v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi [Civil Writ No. 2571 of 1986 dated 3-12-1986], Nand Lal v. State of Haryana AIR 1980 SC 2097,…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492