FA/1188/2007 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 1188 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to civil judge ? ========================================================= DINESHBHAI NANDLAL & 3 - Appellant(s) Versus MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR VC JADAWALA for Appellant(s) : 1 - 4. None for Defendant(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER Date : 29/09/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH) 1. We have heard Mr. V.C.Jadawa, learned advocate appearing for the appellants. FA/1188/2007 2/3 JUDGMENT 2. The present First Appeal is filed challenging the order passed by the learned Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad in MVA No.2706 of 1999. The order of the learned Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad is challenged on the grounds mentioned in the appeal memo. We have considered the grounds in appeal for challenging the judgment. 3. On bare reading of the order under challenge, following facts are emerging, That the appellants are the owner of property bearing MC No.5 situated in TP-7-1 bearing Survey No.617-8-1 + 617-3 of ward Dariapur. The MV Appeal was preferred against the order of assessment made by the respondent Municipal Corporation and the property of the appellants were assessed in the year 1999- 2000. The assessment is of Rs.325/-. The learned Chief Judge has observed that assessment of Rs.325/- cannot be said to be excessive or illegal. The learned Chief Judge has also recorded that no any satisfactory evidence was produced on record qua the FA/1188/2007 3/3 JUDGMENT assessment made by the respondent being illegal or excessive. 4. Nothing emerges either from the submissions or from the appeal memo, which can lead to us to the finding that the assessment of the property is either illegal, improper, unjust or contrary to law. When we are in agreement with the reasons assigned by the learned Chief Judge, there is no need to rewrite the judgment though it is our privilege. 5. As there is no merits in the appeal, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. [C.K.BUCH, J.] [K.M.THAKER, J.] kdc