Authority: High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)

Order Date: 30 September 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Municipal Corporation of the City of Pune, Head Office Shivajinagar, Pune 411005.
  • Respondent: Proprietary firm of Kantilal Nanuram Agarwal, proprietor, residing 31 Bhavani Peth, Pune‑411002, premises 242 Market Yard, Pune.
  • Writ Petition No.: 2095 of 1999 filed under Article 226 challenging the judgment and order dated 03‑08‑1998 passed by the 4th Additional District Judge, Pune in Civil Appeal No. 401 of 1994, which had upheld the Small Causes Court judgment of 29‑01‑1994.
  • Background: Plot No. 242, Market Yard, Gultekdi, Pune (3000 sq ft) leased for 99 years in 1990. Respondent constructed RCC godown (1300 sq ft) and attic (200 sq ft); completion certificate issued 1991.
  • Assessment History: Special Notice No. 1867 dated 23‑12‑1991 proposed increasing the rateable value (RV) from Rs 350 to Rs 17,550 w.e.f. 01‑12‑1991. Assistant Assessor fixed RV at Rs 17,550 on 24‑03‑1992 based on construction cost Rs 150 per sq ft.
  • Appeals: Respondent appealed under Section 406 BPMC Act; Small Causes Court set aside assessment and fixed RV at Rs 2,600 w.e.f. 01‑04‑1991, directing correction of assessment books and refund of excess tax. Municipal Corporation appealed under Section 411 BPMC Act; District Court dismissed appeal on 03‑08‑1998.
  • Counsel Submissions: Petitioner argued the burden of proof lies on the assessee and that parity without reasons is improper, citing several Bombay High Court judgments. Respondent argued parity with adjacent structure is justified and that the construction‑cost basis was incorrect, relying on Supreme Court and other judgments.

Final Outcome

  • The Court quashes the judgment and order dated 03‑08‑1998 (Civil Appeal No. 401 of 1994) and the earlier judgment dated 29‑01‑1994 (Municipal Appeal No. 61 of 1992).
  • The assessment for the year 1991‑92 is restored to the rateable value of Rs 2,600, overturning the previously fixed Rs 17,550.
  • The relief is limited to the fiscal year 1991‑92 only; no order as to costs.
  • All parties are directed to act on the digitally signed QR‑verifiable copy of this order.

Topics: Municipal Tax Assessment, Rateable Value Determination, Court Judgment