Brihanumumbai Mahanagar Palika & Anr. v. Akuti Nirman Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Judgment

CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 620 of 2008. From the final Judgment and Order dated 11.4.2005 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in First Appeal No. 1095 of 2000. Shweta Mazmudar, Atul Y. Chitale and Mrs. Suchitra Atul Chitale for the Appellants. lndu Malhotra, Shashi M. Kapila and Vikas Mehta for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

1Leave granted.

2Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court allowing the appeal filed by the respondents. The appeal was filed !Jy the respondents challenging the order passed by learned Additional Chief Judge of Small Causes Court dated 31.3.2000 in Municipal Appeal No. 19 of 2000 under Section 217 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (in short the 'Act'). In the appeal, the order of assessment passed by the present appellants was under challenge. The order of the appellants related to refusal to entertain the complaint of the respondents and confirmation of rateable value.

3Though many points were urged in support of the appeal, the main plank of the argument of learned counsel for the appellants was that the High Court has not applied its mind to various points urged and after noting the submissions came to abrupt conclusions. In other words it is submitted the judgment is practically non-reasoned.

4Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand said that though elaborate analysis have not been made, yet the conclusions have been arrived at after noting the submissions.

5It is to be noted that various contentious pleas were raised in the appeal. The High Court ought to have analysed the factual position in the background of principles of law involved BRIHANUMUMBAI MAHANAGAR PALIKA&ANR. v. AKUTI NIRMAN PVT. LTD. & ANR. [PASAYAT, J.] and then to decide the appeal. That has not been done.

6It is to be noted that after making detailed reference to the arguments and contentions raised, abrupt conclusions were arrived at by the High Court. That is not a proper way to dispose of the first appeal.

7In the circumstances without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.we set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and remit the matter to it for fresh consideration on merit in accordance with law. 8

8The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent without C any order as to costs. K.K.T. Appeal allowed.