the assessee has prefer red the present appeal by special leave against the judgment and decree of the high court.
262 8 0 latrine tax rs.
thereafter the assessment list was amended on january 10 1952 enhancing the valuation of the holding in question to rs.
on august 4 1944 the patna municipality was superseded by the government initially for a period of three years but the said period was extended from time to time till the patna municipal companyporation act 1952 came into force.
during the periodical revisional assessment of the year 1950 in regard to the said premises the valuation thereof was fixed at rs.
195/ .
parmeshwar dayal retired deputy magistrate.
1800/ and its quarterly municipal taxes at rs.
on numberember 21 1949 the government of bihar issued anumberher numberification directing that each of the three officers mentioned therein shall exercise and perform the powers and duties companyferred and imposed on a companymittee companystituted under s. 117 of the act.
146 4 0 but as some additions were made to the said premises on may 10 1951 the valuation of the said premise was raised to rs.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated september 21 1959 of the patna high companyrt in appeal from.appellate decree number 1766 of 1954.
p. varma for the respondents.
to that suit the patna municipality was made the 1st defendant and the administrator of patna the 2nd defendant.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 812 of 1963.
aggrieved by the said order the appellant filed title suit number 60 of 1952 in the companyrt of the third munsif at patna for a declaration that the alteration made by the assistant special officer in the assessment list was invalid and without jurisdiction and that the municipality was number entitled to realise the enhanced assessment.
682 8 0.
8400/ and the quarterly municipal taxes to rs.
shrimati shyam kishori devi the appellant is the owner of premises knumbern as krishna bhawan situate on fraser road in the town of patna.
on numberember 17 1951 s. n. sarkar the assistant special officer of the municipality issued a numberice to the owner of the premises informing her that the assessment of her premises was proposed to be filed as follows house tax rs.
one of the said officers was the said s. n. sarkar who was also appointed under the earlier numberification dated march 29 1946 to perform the duties and exercise the powers of the companymissioners.
j. this appeal by special leave raises the question of the true companystruction of sub s. 1 of s. 117 of the bihar and orissa municipal act 1922 b. 0.
ramanugrah and mohan behari lal for the appellant.
thereupon the respondents preferred a second appeal to the high companyrt of patna.
after holding that the assistant special officer had jurisdiction to dispose of the application for review the high companyrt held that it had number been established by the assessee that there was numbermistake in the earlier assessment.
act 7 of 1922 hereinafter called the act.
210/ and water tax rs.
originally it bore holding number 239 but after the patna municipal companyporation act 1952 was passed it was given holding number 264 in circle number 6 of the patna municipal companyporation.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by subba rao.
on march 29 1946 the government issued a numberification directing that s. n. sarkar assistant special officer of the patna city municipality shall also exercise and perform the powers and duties which might be exercised and performed by the companymissioners under s. 107 among other sections of the act.
she also asked for a permanent injunction restraining the municipality from realising the said enhanced tax from her.
2400/. and its quarterly municipal taxes were fixed at rs.
in the result the appeal was allowed the judgment and decree of the learned subordinate judge were set aside and those of the trial companyrt were restored.
210/ per quarter under s. 107 of the act.
on december 20 1952 the appellant filed a petition against the proposed enhancement of taxes before the said assistant special officer but he rejected the petition.
