The Hindu 04.02.2010
Property tax payers can file civil suits, says High Court
Mohamed Imranullah S.
| Even without filing appeals before government authorities, it rules |
MADURAI: Property tax payers can file civil suits challenging the assessments made by local bodies even without approaching the higher authorities concerned as provided under the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920, the Madras High Court Bench here has held.
Justice A. Selvam passed the ruling while reversing two concurrent judgements passed by a First Additional District Munsif Court as well as Principal Sub-Court at Kumbakonam in Thanjavur district in 2007 and 2009 respectively. The judge allowed a second appeal filed against these decisions right at the admission stage.
The appellant K.R. Gowri Sedhuraman said that the Kumbakonam Municipality issued a demand notice to her in November 2004 revising the tax amount for her house. The tax was calculated based on a new procedure contemplated through an amendment made to the Municipalities Act in 1997.
Stating that the amendment was not notified by the Government and remained only on paper until it was repealed a few years later, the appellant said that the two lower courts had failed to appreciate her contention and hold that the tax revision based on such an amendment was illegal and arbitrary.
Agreeing with her, Mr. Justice Selvam said: “The courts below, without considering the real legal point involved in the present case, have erroneously non suited the plaintiff. In view of the factual and legal aspects, it is needless to say that the concurrent judgements passed by the courts below are totally absurd and liable to be set aside.”
He pointed out that the Municipality had conceded, in its written statement, that the property tax was revised based on the 1997 amendment to the Act. Even the Revenue Inspector, who was examined as a defence witness, had accepted that the revision was based on new procedures laid down under the amendment.
“The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has befittingly drawn the attention of this Court to the effect that the amending Act was not notified… and also repealed. Since the amending Act was not in force, it is needless to say that the defendant (Municipality) ought to have followed the erstwhile provisions of the Act,” the judge added.
