Disposed

Ana Creations Pvt. Ltd. v. East Delhi Municipal Cororation & Anr.

Delhi HC2 Apr 2019W.P.(C)/758/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi disposed of a writ petition challenging property tax demands. Upon submission that the petitioner was ready to deposit the demanded amount, the Court directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 2,98,674/-. The related CM applications were dismissed as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to deposit Rs. 2,98,674/- within two weeks to settle property tax issue.

Ana Creations Pvt. Ltd. Vs East Delhi Municipal… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~54

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 758/2018, CM Nos. 3181/2018 & 3183/2018 ANA CREATIONS PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Gaurav Vig, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORORATION & ANR

¶7

..... Respondent

¶8

Through: Ms. Mini Pushkarna, SC for EDMC with Ms. Swagata Bhuyan and Ms. Shiva Pandey, Advs. for EDMC with Mr. Brijesh Singh, Additional Commissioner, EDMC.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 02.04.2019

¶12

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the

¶13

following prayers:

¶14

“In view of the facts and circumstances stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

¶15

(a) Pass writ of mandamus of writ/order/direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to act upon and / or give effect to Notice dated 17.01.2018 and / or any other order(s) passed in proceedings relating to the said order dated 17.01.2018 and 09.12.2013.

¶16

(b) Issue a writ a certiorari quashing the notices dated 17.01.2018 and 09.12.2013 issued by the

¶17

respondents and all proceedings resting therewith;

¶18

(c) Pass such further or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.”

¶19

In substance, the challenge in this petition is to a notice dated January 17, 2018 whereby the Corporation has made a demand for Rs.3,24,982/excluding interest at the rate of 1% per month and 30% penalty in respect of property No.307, FIE, Patpatganj Industrial Area, Delhi 110092. The only submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit of Rs. 2,98,674/- as computed by the petitioner, if the respondents do not insist upon the balance of the amount of Rs.26,308/- and also interest at the rate of 1% per month and 30% penalty.

¶20

Ms. Mini Pushkarna, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has taken instruction from Mr. Brijesh Singh, Additional Commissioner, EDMC and states that the respondents are ready and willing to accept the amount of Rs. 2,98,674/- from the petitioner to put quietus to the issue. Learned counsel for the petitioner also states he shall not press the petition as well.

¶21

Noting the above, it is directed that the petitioner shall deposit the amount of Rs. 2,98,674/-.within two weeks from today. On such deposit, the

¶22

issue with regard to the property tax for the period up to March 31, 2004 shall be treated as settled. Ordered accordingly.

¶23

The writ petition stands disposed of.

¶24

CM Nos. 3181/2018 & 3183/2018

¶25

Dismissed as infructuous.

¶26

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

¶27

APRIL 02, 2019 /aky

Ana Creations Pvt. Ltd. v. East Delhi Municipal Cororation & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ana Creations Pvt. Ltd. v. East Delhi Municipal Cororation & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anshul Hiramani Pandey and Anr. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Narender Singh and Anr. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Umed Singh and Anr. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Gaurav Saini Vs the Deputy Commissioner South Delhi Municipal Corporation

Management Committee of Sunrise Apartments Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Tapan Tyagi Vs Law Centre-Ii Faculty of Law

Dr. Tarsem Lal Vs Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare and Ors.

Residents of Bodal Gali Vs East Delhi Municipal Corporation

Gaurav Saini Vs the Deputy Commissioner South Delhi Municipal Corporation

Smt. Suman Lata Jain Vs Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) and Ors.

Mohd. Nizamauddin Shaikh Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation

Chandra Shekhar Vs MCD and Anr.

University of Delhi Vs Santosh Kumar Tiwari

Sudha Nauman Vs NCT of Delhi & Ors.