Dismissed

Viom Infra Networks Maharashtra Ltd. and Anr. v. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Bombay HC20 Jan 2015WP/1650/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a writ petition challenging property tax demands. It held that the remedy under section 406 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 is efficacious. Factual controversies regarding the nature of towers and natural justice breaches are within the appellate authority's jurisdiction. Merits are kept open.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; contentions on merits and remedy kept open.

Viom Infra Networks Maharashtra Ltd. and Anr. Vs Navi… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

Shiv

¶2

1 w1650.14

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1650 OF 2014

¶5

Viom Infra Networks Maharashtra Ltd. & Anr. .. Petitioners. Vs. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation and Ors. .. Respondents.

¶6

Mr.Pradeep Bakhru along with Mr.Shikhar Khare and Ms.Komal Modi i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co. for the Petitioners. Mr.V.S. Gokhale AGP for Respondent No.4.

¶7

CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.K. MENON, JJ.

¶8

DATED : 20TH JANUARY, 2015

¶9

P.C.

¶10

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned AGP for Respondent No.4.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners does not dispute that against the demand for property taxes, a remedy under section 406 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 is available. However, he submitted that the remedy is not efficacious. He submits that the towers on which the taxes have been levied are neither land nor the buildings which can be subjected to payment of the property taxes. He submits that there is a breach of principles of natural justice.

¶12

2 w1650.14

¶13

As far as the first submission is concerned, the appellant can always adduce the evidence before the appellate authority as regards the nature of towers in support of the contention that no property taxes could be levied on the towers erected by the petitioners. It is ultimately a factual controversy which can be decided by the appellate authority which in this case is the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division.

¶14

As far as the second submission is concerned, again the same can be gone into by the appellate authority. Hence, we do not agree with the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the remedy under section 406 of the Act is not an efficacious remedy. The issues raised by the petitioners can be gone into by the appellate authority. Hence subject to what is observed above, the petition is dismissed. All contentions on merits are kept open. The remedy is also kept open.

¶15

(A.K. MENON, J.)

¶16

(A.S. OKA, J.)

Viom Infra Networks Maharashtra Ltd. and Anr. v. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Viom Infra Networks Maharashtra Ltd. and Anr. v. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vasanji Maya Karia Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Saiprasad Mangesh Kalyankar Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mr. Pandurang Sadashiv Bapat Vs Chiplun Nagar Parishad through Its Chief Officer and Ors.

Mr. Sanjay Shashikant Desai Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary of Urban Development Department and Ors.

Mr. Sanjay Shashikant Desai Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Raosaheb Ramrao Patil Vs Election Commission of India, through Chief Election Commissioner and Ors.