1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1267 of 1996 The Municipal Corporation of Gr. Bombay & Anr. .. Appellants versus Tasneem Shabbir Harianwala & ors .. Respondents ... Mr.R.T. Walavalkar i/b Smt.A.H.Chhedda and Shri M.R. Kulkarni for the appellants. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 24th November 2008 JUDGEMENT:- JUDGEMENT:- JUDGEMENT:- 1. Heard. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 20th April 1994 passed by Small causes Court allowing Municipal Appeal no.166 of 1989 of the respondents. 2 3. Respondents are the owners of the property known as "Shabbir Building" situated at 25, Mahela Patel Agiary Path, Grant Road, bearing Municipal Ward No. D-3963 (hereinafter referred to as "the suit property"). Prior to 1st April 1988, rateable value in respect of the suit property was Rs.5,975/-. By a special notice dated 12th February 1989, the appellant municipal corporation proposed to increase the rateable value from Rs.5,975/- to Rs.14,270/-. The respondents objected to the increase and submitted their objections. By an order dated 23rd August 1989, the respondents accepted part of the objections moderated the proposed increase and fixed rateable value at Rs.10,155/-. 4. Being aggrieved by the decision of the appellant the respondents filed an appeal, bearing Municipal Appeal no.166 of 1989 in the Small Causes Court at Bombay. Before the Small Causes Judge, Bombay, appellants contended certain repairs/ alterations were made in the property and on that count the appellants had increased the rateable value to Rs.10,155/-. The respondents did not adduce any oral evidence but only contended that the increase in the rateable value could not have been made with 3 retrospective effect. The assessment order was passed on 23rd February 1989 and could not have been given retrospective effect w.e.f. the Assessment Year 1988-89 i.e. w.e.f. 1st April 1988. This contention was accepted by the Addl. Judge of the Small Causes Court who while confirming the rateable value in the sum of Rs.10,155/- held that the rateable value would be effective from the Financial Year 1989-90 i.e. w.e.f. 1.4.1989 instead of from 1988-89. 5. Before me. learned counsel for the appellant submitted that rateable value could have been fixed with retrospective effect. He submitted that the Small Causes Court has erred in striking down the retrospective effect. In my view, submission has no merit. Perusal of the judgement of the Small Causes Court shows that relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Municipal Corporation of City of Hubli Vs. Subba Rao reported in AIR 1976 SC 1396, the Small Causes Court has held that the rateable value could not have been fixed with restrospective effect. In case of Municipal Corporation of City of Hubli (Supra) the Supreme Court has held that the assessment list to be effective must be authenticated before the expiry of financial year for which it is prepared. In the 4 present case, the order was passed on 22nd/23rd August 1989 and therefore, it could be effected from the Financial Year 1989-90 i.e. w.e.f. 1.4.1989. That is exactly what has been done by the Small Causes Court. Small Causes Court has struck down the retrospective effect and has permitted assessment only w.e.f. 1.4.1989 which is the commencement of the financial year 1989-90. 6. No error is found in the decision of the Small Causes Court. There is no merit in the appeal which is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. (D.G. KARNIK, J)