Appeals by certificate from the judgment and order dated November 22, 23 and 24, 1966 of the Bombay High Court in Special Civil Applications Nos.
1 in C. As.
Sharad Manohar and B. P. Maheshwari, for respondent No.
1194/67 .
L. Sanghi, C. K. Ratnaparkhi and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for the appellant in C.A. No.
1194 and 1197 of 1967 .
N. Phadke, Sharad Manohar and B. P. Maheshwari, for respondent No.
2 in C.As.
1196/67 .
1194, 11 96, 1197 1250 of 1967.
2 in C.As.
N. Lokur, G. L. Sanghi, C. K. Ratnaparkhi, A. G. Ratna parkhi and B. M. Srivastava, for respondent No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
N. Lokur, C. K. Ratnaparkhi, A. G. Ratnaparkhi and M. Srivastava, for the appellant in C.A. No.
1196 1250/67 .
In 1947, the appellant Municipality made fresh rules for levy of house tax and rule 2 c of the new rules ran as follows 2 c In the case of mills and factories and buildings companynected therewith, house tax on buildings shall be levied at the usual rate on the annual rental value fixed at Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MATHEW, J. The respondents in these appeals filed writ peti tions in the Bombay High Court challenging the validity of the Borough Municipalities Validation of Certain Taxes on Buildings and Lands Act, 1965 Maharashtra Act No.
1 in C.As.
1197 and 1250/67 and Respondent No.
111 of 1966 , hereinafter called the Validating Act, on the ground that the provisions of the Act violated their fundamental rights under Art.
These appeals, by certificate, are directed against the judgment of the Division Bench.
C. Bhandare, B. D. Sharma, for the appellants in C.As.
14 and granted the prayer for restraining the appellant Municipality from levying and companylecting the tax.
A Division Bench of the High Court held that sections 3 b , 4 1 , 4 2 and 5 of the Validating Act were invalid as they companytravened Art.
1476 and 1424 of 1966.
14 of the Constitution and for restraining the appellants from levying house tax on the mills, factories and buildings companynected therewith of the respondents or companylecting the same from them.
Against the decrees dismissing the suits, appeals were preferred to this Court and they were finally disposed of by this Court in Lokamanya Mills, Barsi Ltd. v. Barsi Borough Municipality 1 .
Barsi, Limited, claimed refund of amounts paid by them on the basis that Rule 2 c was ultra vires the Boroughs Act and they filed 4 suits for the same.
1194 and 1196/67 .
1197 1250/67 .
Till the year 1947, the appellant Municipality used to levy house tax on the mills, factories and buildings companynected therewith of the respondents in these appeals on the basis of their annual letting value and the annual letting value for this purpose was ascertained in the numbermal way, that is, by ascertaining the amount at which the buildings might reasonably be expected to let from year to year.
