1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 827 OF 1991 Suraiya Akbarali Jetha & ors. .. Petitioners versus J.M. Swarup, District Valuation Officer and others .. Respondents ... Mr. Subhash Shetty with Mr.P.C. Tripathi and Mr.K.N. Kandekar for the petitioner. Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for respondents. CORAM : F. I. REBELLO AND D.G. KARNIK, JJ DATED : 7th September 2009 P.C:- 1. The petitioner had approached this court in respect of method of valuation. The Valuation Officer followed “land and building” method. The contention on behalf of the petitioner was that the Valuation Officer had to do the valuation in terms of Schedule III to the Wealth Tax Act. The issue in our opinion, is covered by the judgement of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Sharvan Kumar Swarup And Sons, 210ITR 886 in favour of the petitioner herein. 2 2. Interim relief was granted at the stage of admission in terms of prayer clause (d). We are informed that based on the land-cum- building method of valuation, assessment was completed for the year 1985-86 and for the subsequent years it was made subject to the orders that may be passed in the present petition. 3. Considering the petition was admitted and interim relief granted, we otherwise would not have granted such a relief as a remedy of the petitioner would have been to prefer an appeal against those orders. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and as the matter is pending in this court for the last 18 years, we set aside the order of assessment from 1985-86 to 1988-89 and direct the Assessing Officer to re-assess the petitioner based on the law as declared in Sharvan Kumar Swarup And Sons. 3. Rule made absolute. There shall be no order as to costs. 4. The entire exercise to be completed within six months from the copy of the order being served by the petitioner on the Assessing Officer. (D.G. KARNIK, J) (F.I. REBELLO, J)