High CourtsSingle Bench(2001) 05 DEL CK 0076

Sh. M.R. Arora vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Delhi High Court · Decided on 10 May 2001 · Citation: (2001) 5 AD 1001

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manmohan Sarin, J
CASE NUMBER
CW. No. 5892 and CMs. 9059 of 2000, 5180 of 2001

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 365 words

Manmohan Sarin, J.—Rule.

With the consent of the parties writ petition is taken up for disposal.

2.

Petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking quashing of bill (Annexure P-9) in the sum of Rs.65,181/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 9.10.1998, the appeal of the petitioner against the fixation of rateable value vide order dated 21.9.1993 was accepted by the Additional District Judge. The Additional District Judge fixed an interim rateable value of Rs.15,000/-, keeping in view that it took quite sometime to decide the remanded cases. The present grievance of the petitioner emanates out of the bill (Annexure P-9) for Rs.65,181/- as arrears.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on judgment dated 3.2.2000 in CW.No.120/2000, when this Court quashed a demand notice issued and remanded the matter back to the Assessor & Collector for re-determination and re-assessment.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the tax for each year works out to Rs.2,000/-. Based on this amount of Rs.2,000/- even if the amount is calculated from the year 1987-88, the tax payable would not exceed Rs.30,000/- or so. Learned counsel submits that petitioner has already deposited a sum of Rs.16,961/- vide receipt No.898093 dated 29.2.2000.

5.

Let the petitioner deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/- against the aforesaid bill. Subject to deposit, as aforesaid, no coercive steps shall be taken for recovery of Rs.65,181/-, as billed.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has an apprehension that the building plans to be submitted by the petitioner may not be approved on account of pendency of the remanded cases even with the payment of Rs.30,000/-, as directed by this Court. The pendency of the remanded proceedings or non-liquidation of arrears, if any, under the impugned bill will not come in the way of the respondent in entertaining the application or processing of the building plans.

7.

The remanded assessments be also completed within two months from today.

8.

Counsel for the parties are agreed that petitioner would appear before the Joint Assessor and Collector (West Zone), Rajouri Garden, New Delhi on 11.6.2001. The writ petition stands disposed of. A copy of the order be given dusty to counsel for the parties.