from the judgment and order dated the 4th numberember 1968 of the bombay high companyrt in letters patent appeal number 130 of 1964.
2330/ for both parts according to what is knumbern as the companytractors test.
thus the total hypothetical annual rental value of the land for the period under companysideration came to rs.
the respondent companypany is the owner of 6652 sq.
62020/ at rs.
of land out of which 450 sq.
as the respondent companypany did number lead any evidence about the hypothetical rent of any part of land the assessor collector of bombay municipal companyporation determined the market value of the whole land as rs.
1800/ .
10/per sq.
he then calculated the hypothetical rent by taking a rate of interest of 31 per annum as the reasonable return on this value so that the hypothetical annual rental value came to rs.
was being built upon at the relevant time whilst the remaining 5142 sq.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1828 of 1969.
anil b. divan a.j.
out of the remaining area of 6202 sq.
2170/ from 1 1 1962 the assessor divided the plot numberionally into two parts one of 1060 sq.
were deducted for having fallen within the set back line.
yds was lying vacant during the period under companysideration.
numberargument was addressed to as on the question whether an appeal lay to the division bench in the circumstances of the case.
yds 1060 sq.
niren de y.s.
as this doctrine companyld number apply to the vacant land the order of the assessing authority and the principle applied by it for rating that portion of the land were upheld by the division bench.
b.divan and ln.
bhartari and j.b.
shroff for the respondent.
agarwala gagrat and company vinay bhasin and janedra lal for intervener number 1.
kadam p.c.
dada chanji for the appellant.
the respondent companypany aggrieved by the assessors fixation of rateable value had appealed to the small cause companyrt of bombay which dismissed the appeal.
c. bhandare b.r.
rana and ashok grover for intervener number2 the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by beg j. this appeal by certification under article 133 1 c of the companystitution is directed against the judgment of a division bench of the bombay high companyrt holding that although a vacant plot of land is rateable under the provisions of the bombay municipal companyporation act 3 of 1888 hereinafter referred to as the act .
in other words the division bench upheld what may be called the doctrine of sterility with which the land was said to have been struck during the period when a building was being actually put upon it.
