: 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4137 OF 1992 Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation ... Petitioner V/s. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. ltd. ... Respondent a/w WRIT PETITION NO.4138 OF 1992 Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation ... Petitioner V/s. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. ltd. ... Respondent a/w WRIT PETITION NO.4140 OF 1992 Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation ... Petitioner V/s. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. ltd. ... Respondent a/w WRIT PETITION NO.4145 OF 1992 Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation ... Petitioner V/s. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. ltd. ... Respondent a/w WRIT PETITION NO.4147 OF 1992 Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation ... Petitioner V/s. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. ltd. ... Respondent : 2 : AND WRIT PETITION NO.4157 OF 1992 Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation ... Petitioner V/s. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. ltd. ... Respondent Mr.P.K. Dhakephalkar i/b S.R. Ganbavale for Petitioner Mr.Milind Sathe a/w S.M. Gorwadkar and Mr.H.N. Vakil for Respondent CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 11th AUGUST, 2009 P.C.: 1. The challenge in these petitions is to the ratable value fixed by the Corporation i.e. the petitioner herein in respect of the hostel premises of the respondent company. The Corporation has fixed the ratable value by calculating the annual letting value at 8% of the construction cost. 2. The company aggrieved by the revision in the ratable value filed a municipal Appeal before the Small Causes Court, Pune. That appeal was allowed and the assessment with respect to the hostel premises was set aside. It was held that the ratable value should be lower than the amount calculated by the Corporation. 3. The Corporation therefore, preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Pune. That appeal was allowed partly. The annual letting value was fixed at a flat rate of 6% of the construction cost and the ratable value was fixed by deducting 10% from that amount. Aggrieved by that decision, the Corporation has filed the : 3 : present petitions. 4. Arguments similar to the ones advanced in Writ Petition No.4136 of 1992 have been advanced on behalf of both the parties. 5. For the reasons stated in the decision in Writ Petition No.4136 of 1992, these petitions are allowed. Rule made absolute. No costs.