http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  620 of 2008

PETITIONER: Brihanmumbai Mahanagar Palika & Anr

RESPONDENT: Akruti Nirman Pvt. Ltd. & Anr

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 23/01/2008

BENCH: Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT & P. SATHASIVAM

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

1.      Leave granted.

2.      Challenge 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 by 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 \021Act\022).   In the appeal, the order of assessment passed by the present  appellants was under challenge.  The order of the respondents  related to refusal to entertain the complaint of the respondents  and confirmation of rateable value.

3.      Though 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.

4.      Learned 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.        5.      It 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 and then to decide the appeal. That has not been  done.       6.      It 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.       7.      In 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.      The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent without any

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

order as to costs.