This article is written by Charu Kohli. The article deals with the case of Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. vs. Municipal Committee, Dhamangao (1966), with reference to its facts, issues raised, arguments made, the judgement, as well as the concerned legal provisions of the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. vs. Municipal Committee, Dhamangao (1966) is a landmark judgement rendered by the Apex Court in the light of providing solutions to the local governmental bodies and maintainability of the rights regarding the property. The case tackles a handful of legal questions related to the tax regime and policy in the municipality, property rights, and municipal regulations. It sheds light on how complicated an issue can be, when the private entities and municipal authorities of the area come in for a dispute in regard to the property law as well as the taxation regime. Further, it made the notion clear that public interest is the foremost priority of the welfare State even when it comes to the matters of taking over land and imposing taxes on them. The judgement has also stressed the need and the importance of following all the proper legal procedures when it comes to levying of the taxes and assessing them. It’s a real eye-opener on the intricacies of these matters.
Significance of the case
The case of Dhamangaon (1966) is an important case in the field of municipal law and taxation policy in India. It has sowed views on the assessment of tax made by the Municipal Committee of Dhamangaon which was held to be illegal and ultra vires the provisions of the committee. The case had a major impact on the interpretation of the law of taxation and the municipal authority’s powers in functioning to the bottom level of the legislature i.e. the municipalities in the cities. It brought forth the limitations on which the Municipal Committee can extract taxes from the private enterprises and stressed on the procedural due diligence to be followed by the municipal authorities while levying taxes and the manner of imposition of such taxes. The decision taken in the case was followed as a precedent for the future cases which arose between the private company and the local government authority on the issue of taxation. It laid down the broad principles which are required for the extraction of taxes from the enterprising entities and delved into the subject matter of property law in order to understand trust and property rights.
Background of the case
In the year of 1961, the Bombay High Court gave a landmark judgement that has acted as a key component in highlighting the power and duty of municipal officials in order to levy taxes in the area under their lawful jurisdiction. The appellant in the case was the company named Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. and the trust formulated by them whereas the defendant in the case was the Municipal Committee of Dhamangaon also known as the Dhamangaon Notified Area Committee. The Municipal Committee was a local body that was entrusted with the duty of managing the municipal affairs including taxation assessment of the particular area. The appellant had properties within the limits of that Municipal Committee. The Municipal Committee attempted to assess taxes on the properties of the appellant. This was the root of the dispute between the two parties. This case in Indian property law is important because of the decision which was passed on the principle of ‘prescriptive rights’ or the ‘adverse possession’. Therefore, in the case at hand, the business activities as well as property rights of the appellant were disturbed.
Facts of Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. vs. Municipal Committee, Dhamangao, (1966)
Bharat Kala Bhandar (Private Limited) was a limited liability company that possessed a cotton ginning and pressing facility in Dhamangaon, Maharashtra. The Dhamangaon Notified Area Committee (NAC) as per its duty, imposed a tax on the cotton ginning and pressing of the area, since they were regarded as commercial activities. These activities involved the mechanical processes of producing cotton as a product to be sold in the market. From the year 1936, the rate of tax was notified at 1 anna per bojha and 1 anna per bale under the ambit of 66(1)(b) of the Central Provinces Municipalities Act 1922. Anna which is officially written as ānna was a form of the currency unit which was formerly used in the subcontinent of British India and it is equal to one-sixteen the value of a present-day rupee. Whereas, the term bojha means a unit of measurement which is used to calculate the weight of cotton in the cotton industry. The general public including the commercial workers in the cotton industry were made aware of the notification by the authorities regarding the change in the taxation price. This was done on April 10, 1941, by the publishing of the same in the government’s official gazette.
Further, on July 30, 1941, the regulations regarding the same were officially released and these rules were now officially to be followed by all. Since the 1941 tax reform, the commercial industries in the cotton industry in the municipal area of Dhamangaon including the Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. had been paying their taxes as per the updated tax slabs and were following the new tax regime by the NAC. But in 1951, the NAC proposed another hike from one rupee per bojha and one rupee per bale therefore, the companies started paying the same as per the rule. The rate of tax revised was now up to 4 annas per bojha and 4 annas per bale. Although, later the said proposal of the amendment was dropped by the Notified Area Committee itself and it never turned into a rule.
As a result, Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. decided to take legal action to recover the excess taxes they had paid over a period of three years. The company had paid the taxes as per the new proposed amendment because it had its head office in the state of Calcutta and further, a branch office and the ginning factory were set up in Dhamangaon which fell within the NAC area of authorization and jurisdiction. Hence, the company was under due obligation to pay taxes. This was because it was undertaking a commercial activity and its ginning plant was situated in the area under NAC i.e. Dhamangaon, which was previously part of the Central Provinces & Berar (now known as the state of Maharashtra).
The main legal issue in the case as presented by the Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. which they contested against was the undue assessments done by the NAC and the undue property tax enhancement which was committed by the committee for a period of 3 years both of which were felt to be not as per standard of law. The NAC had over the years proposed to enhance the taxes from four annas to one rupee per bojha and per bale in 1951, but this never turned into an official gazette rule. The suit was therefore filed by Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. and other factory owners to recover the excess payment of taxes made by them within the time period of three years on the ground that the taxes were illegally demanded and were paid by mistake.
Under the case, the company had claimed a refund of Rs. 12,511.66, which included Rs. 6,905.146 for ginned cotton and Rs. 8,048.80 for pressed cotton, minus Rs. 3,738.96 legally due, and Rs. 1,295.96 as interest at 9%. They contended that the increased tax which was imposed on them exceeded the legal limits even after the due legislative changes in the regime of tax itself. Further, the property tax assessment of the company has also been disputed as they were of the view that the NAC had taken up an arbitrary way of assessing the property and therefore sought a re-evaluation based on proper legal criteria.
Another major part of the case was the dispute over ownership of a piece of land. The company argued that it had been in continuous and uninterrupted possession of the land for more than twelve years and had developed the land by putting up a temple and other auxiliary buildings therefore it belonged to them wholly. The company claimed its uninterrupted long-term possession over the property and development on the said property without any sort of municipal objection which guarantees its rightful possession over it.
However, the NAC contended that the registration of the trust’s ownership was not true, since the land was officially owned by the municipality and the title deed also belonged to the municipality since it was a government property. The committee was of the view that the land was part of a public street and therefore, not owned by the company and that the company had wilfully encroached upon the property and taken over the place. Further, they claimed that it was taken over by the company illegally by the formation of the trust and that the company had no legal ownership over it and was bound to return it back to the municipality.
Therefore, the company filed the case in the Trial Court which gave the judgement in favour of the appellants stating that the surplus tax should be reclaimed from the Municipal Committee within three years from the date of the suit. However, an appeal was filed in the High Court by the Dhamangaon Municipal Committee wherein the Court decreed the suit as bad since it did not comply with the prerequisites of Section 48 of the C.P. Berar Act, 1922. The Court here held that the notice was not served to the NAC which was to be sent two months prior to filing the suit. Also, the limitation period for sending the notice was six months from the date of the alleged cause of action which was also followed through by the company. This judgement of the High Court of Bombay made the appellants file a suit in the Supreme Court to recover the extra taxes paid by them.
Issues raised
In this case, the interpretation of the law in force had become the basic matter in dispute and the need was for the Hon’ble Court to analyse the law and give out its interpretation in order to clear the air on the matter at hand. The question here was whether the excessive amount which was collected under the sales tax “an act done or proposed to be done by law” under Article 276 of the Constitution and Section 48(1) of the Central Provinces and Berar Municipality Act, 1922 (Act No. 11 of 1922) or not. Further, the issues presented for discussion before the Hon’ble Apex Court of the nation were:
- Whether the tax assessment conducted by NAC on the property of the company Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. is in accordance with the law and follows the procedure established by law or not?
- Whether the property rights of the company were being infringed by the Municipal Committee?
- Whether under Article 300A, the right to property of the Constitution of India is abridged by the act of the municipality?
- What is the ambit and what are the limitations of Municipal regulations in terms of taxation, assessment of property and the administrative procedure?
- Whether the Municipal Committee has the power and authorization to issue a demolition notice without following due process of law?
- Whether the structure created by the company on the land of the municipality causes a public nuisance or is it a hazard to public safety?
There were various bones of contention in the case and one such point was whether the Municipality had the legal right to levy rates or taxes upon the property of Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd., having regard to their character and ownership. Further, the case also discussed the ambit and powers related to Tax Assessment and Property Rights.
The issue of the amount of control the local government can exercise over the property of an individual and the rules regarding the same were also the point of keen interest in this case. It was so because according to the company, the assessment which was done by the Municipal Committee did not follow the established law.
The question of whether acts done by the Municipal Committee, including tax collection, fell within their legal powers according to the law was being contested in these appeals. The interpretation given to Section 84(3) of the Act in question which prescribed limits upon the committee’s powers also formed part of bone contention here as well as its effect on the validity of any suit brought against them.
In this matter different authorities involving jurisdictional issues, constitutional rights of citizens vis a vis state organs’ powers; principles of administrative law governing remedies available where such rights have been violated or threatened with violation through executive action taken in bad faith or under error mixed with were considered carefully within the context of property rights cases generally decided either by way precedents for future guidance or otherwise, it be overruled in appropriate circumstances which should now arise.
Arguments of the parties
The appellant argued that the suit for the recovery of an illegal tax fell outside the provisions of Section 48 of the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, as it was a claim for a refund of excess tax paid.
The respondent contended that the collection of a tax above the constitutional limit was not without jurisdiction but only illegal or irregular, making the suit fall under matters “purported to be done under the Act” and subject to Section 48 of the C.P. Berar Act,1922.
Appellant
In the case at hand, the legal conflict revolved around the matter of the tax which was levied by the Municipal Committee involving Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. The company here came up with multiple contentions in order to support the position of having faced excessive tax as imposed by the NAC. This included the assertion by the company that the Committee’s actions have acted in a way that has infringed upon their basic rights, and therefore, such an act has led to the violation of their fundamental rights of the Indian Constitution. They stated that the activities of NAC were not only capricious and unlawful but it has also hindered their freedom to do commercial activities peacefully. The act of tax imposition by the NAC in a lawful manner was deemed to have been an unnecessary interference by the Bhandar. Moreover, the company had stated that the respondent municipality had no legal right to act in such a manner that overstepped its jurisdiction and ultimately caused prejudice to the appellant’s commercial enterprise.
More so, the appellants also objected to the various procedural irregularities in the conduct of the Committee while imposing the tax regulation and even while they assessed the property. They alleged that it did not follow due process nor did it observe the right to be heard which resulted in an unjust decision against them. Moreover, they also contended huge financial losses were occasioned by the actions taken by the Municipal Committee. The losses were, therefore, claimed to be unjustified and further aggravating the damage already caused by their acts on the business operations of the appellant. It was alleged that the illegality of the levy is due to the ceiling on the commercial and professional tax liability of an individual provided for under Section 142A of the Government of India Act, 1935 (the 1935 Act in short) and Article 276 of the Constitution. The ceiling provided by the Constitution was Rs. 250. Under the 1935 Act, it is Rs. 50. What was collected from the appellant is the tax levied on him whose amount when assessed exceeded the statutory limit and therefore, the amount was levied in excess of the statutory limit and is an illegal levy.
The Appellant argued, represented by Adv. S.G. Patwardhan, Adv. S Murthy, and Adv. BP Maheshwari challenged what had been done by contending that it was beyond its powers, therefore, ultra vires and that there could not be any recovery under laws prohibiting the collection of rates like taxes apart from this.
In view of these submissions, the appellant moved to the Hon’ble Court. They prayed to the Court to provide them with the compensation for their lost money and pleaded with the Court to declare as illegal all steps taken by the Municipal Committee. These were the reasons advanced by the appellants against the Municipal Committee at Dhamangaon highlighting diverse legal & procedural matters for which they sought the intervention of the courts.
Respondent
On the contrary, Adv. Viswanatha Sastri, representing the respondent, supported the actions of the Municipal Committee. He argued that tax on professions, trades, and callings fell within the scope of the Provincial Legislature and transferred to the State Legislature therefore, the state had imposed the new tax regime. He stated that thereby it exceeded the limit prescribed by the Constitution of India but it was not without authority rather it be irregular or illegal and any recovery suit brought by a taxpayer for amounts paid over and above the constitutional mandate is to be regarded as a matter ‘purported to be done’ under the Act.
Adv. Sastri also cited various authorities based on tax assessment being done by competent officers as provided for in the Act and rules which were authorised to be made there under. He further argued that even though some rules might have been ultra vires and consequently illegal those were purportedly done by virtue of them having been made or confirmed under the act while acting under such purported authority; any recovery suit brought by a taxpayer for amounts paid in excess of this alleged maximum should therefore, fall within matters ‘purported to be done’ under that Act subject to terms laid down in relevant sections he referred.
Furthermore, they based their defence on Section 142A of the Government of India Act, 1935, and Article 276 of the Constitution of India, whereby they emphasised the legislative intent behind these statutes regarding the imposition of taxes on professions, trade, calling, and employment. They contended further that the enactment of laws had shed light on the powers which are granted to both the Central and the Provincial Legislatures in order to provide some sort of exemptions or even impose any necessary restrictions. This is done to ensure that there is preservation of freedom of trade, commerce, industry, and occupation, and in order to guarantee citizens’ rights during times of peace, public order, and morality in the society.
They put emphasis on the power of the Hon’ble Court and its jurisdiction in the matter to handle the issue. This question was argued by the NAC stating that the case should be dealt with under the control of another legal body and they further proceeded to legally state that the jurisdiction of the court is against the procedure and therefore, invalid. They were of the view that the jurisdiction of the court currently in session was inadequate and thereby it was denied by the municipality authorities. They also disputed the legality of the notice which was sent by the company as being flawed because of procedural mistakes and substantive flaws which they contended made it invalid.
The NAC claimed that the Bhandar did not meet the legal standards and there was a breach of their duties before starting legal proceedings as they had not supplied the municipality with any sort of notice regarding the tax refund before beginning the official trial proceedings of the same. They also pointed out that the company did not have the right to ask for certain relief as they did not have a strong enough legal interest or involvement in the case to continue with legal action since the property actually belonged to the municipality itself.
Furthermore, the Respondent here had used estoppel as a defence in order to support the claims made by the Appellant, stating that the previous act, words, or behaviour should stop them from claiming their rights. Finally, the respondent emphasised that here the importance is of public interest and wider social consequences related to the case.
Legislative provisions involved in Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. vs. Municipal Committee, Dhamangao, (1966)
Government of India Act, 1935
The Government of India Act, of 1935 was explored to address the ambit of the ownership dispute. Here, the Dhamangaon Municipal Committee claimed the land to rightfully belong to them as the property was a government property and they even had the title deed of the same.
However, here the company stated that the land was rightfully theirs as a matter of adverse right. It was claimed so because the company had uninterrupted use of the land for more than 12 years and even created a trust over it. Further, they claimed this trust building to be tax exempted as per Section 43(1)(b) of the Government of India Act, 1935 as it was claimed to be a ‘deemed university’ as per the Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956.
Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922
The central issue of the case revolves around the understanding and the application of the C.P. Berar Municipalities Act, 1922 as it came into force to establish the municipalities in the districts and to define the powers and responsibilities of the committee for the regulation and maintenance of the district. The power of taxation and regulation is well defined by the Act and therefore, its integration is necessary to understand the workings of NAC in this case.
The Act of 1922 in the ambit of Section 48 and Section 84(3) talked in detail about the scope of the suit which was filed for the refund of excess tax paid and further discussed the barring of such suit. The municipalities legal authority to levy the taxes which are increased and the taxes on the property also fall under the ambit of this section. The act helped the Hon’ble Court to determine the procedural law and discuss the legal requirements required for the imposition of taxes. Further, it stated that before filing a suit for excessive tax payback, the need is to send a notice to the required authorities.
Trial Court’s judgement
The Trial Court held the decision in favour of Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. The decision regarding the municipal taxation conflict was delivered and the Hon’ble trial Court decided that the taxes imposed on the appellant company were excessive in nature and therefore, the Municipal Committee was not permitted to collect it legally. This act by the municipal authorities was seen to be one that was beyond the legal competence of the committee.
According to the Municipal Committee, they imposed these taxes within the limits of the C.P. and Berar Municipalities Act, (1922), and that their actions were correct and as per the procedure established by the law. They stated that the taxes were correctly assessed with reference to rules and precedents applicable in the Act and therefore, they have no liability to repay.
However, the Trial Court held in its judgement, that the taxes levied by the NAC were quite beyond what is provided for under the statute and that while the municipality levies the tax, it is to be bound by the statute and its procedures. The Hon’ble Court also noticed the fact that: “Therefore if this be so, then it must follow that there can be no question but what has been done was clearly illegal and ultra vires but more so even if there had been no such provision made here at all.” Consequently, the Court ruled that the overcharged amount should be refunded back to the company within three years as it was a matter of their right to get the money back.
This decision gave relief to the company Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. by directing a refund of extra tax realised from them but also was helpful in holding out the responsibility of the authorities to follow the process established by law. This breakthrough by the Trial Court not only reemphasizes on how essential it is for statutory limits to be followed strictly but also, deals with the arena of the procedural formalities which are to be followed to the word during the case of municipal taxation. In addition, this ruling helped underline the role of the legal principles like adverse right over property and also establish the rules which the local government should follow whenever they are dealing with revenue matters.
Furthermore, the Trial Court’s decision in favour of Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd implicated that the protection of the taxpayers from the arbitrary imposition of unlawful taxes is the duty of the law. It also helped lay down the duties of the authorities while at the same time ensuring fairness and justice are observed and delivered in such processes by the due process of law.
High Court’s judgement
The case when presented in the Bombay High Court brought about many legal problems covering the right of ownership to property and municipality laws.
Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd., a private company, had taken issue with the tax they had been charged by the Municipal Committee on grounds of being too high and against the law. They argued that these taxes did not fall under Section 48 of C.P. & Berar Municipalities Act, 1922. The taxes were disputed to be unlawful and therefore, they had a right over the refund money and it is the duty of the municipality to refund the same. At the same time, there was also a dispute over who had title deeds through the long use of pieces of land while this organisation opposed it, saying they belonged to them.
The Municipality Committee made a claim of ownership by adverse possession which is a legal concept where land can become yours if someone else owns it but doesn’t use it over a long period, namely 12 years. In this case, however, specific set statutory rules must be followed without relying on any formal conveyance being made.
In the course of its consideration, the High Court analysed in detail the contentions as well as pieces of evidence adduced by each party regarding their interpretation of Section 48, the compliance with legal formalities, and the validity of such proprietary claims based on prescription.
In the end, what came out from this historic judgement was two-fold; first, the recognition that the trust acquired title to these lands through adverse possession and has a possessory right over the land due to the uninterrupted possession. It was stated so because the company had control over the property for a period of 12 years and it was never taken up by the municipality in this period.
The second upholding was that the company’s suit seeking recovery from rates charged by local authority failed because they had not complied with procedural requirements contained in section 48. This decision had wide-reaching effects as it laid down rules that must be followed when challenging assessments levied by municipalities for taxes. It further showed when rights may be acquired through prescription clarified duties played by courts vis a vis local self-government.
Judgement in Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. vs. Municipal Committee, Dhamangao, (1966)
In this case of Dhamangao, the Supreme Court gave the ruling after carefully looking at the power given to local municipal authorities in order to impose the taxes on properties within their jurisdictional area. The decision was reached after weighing the fine line between property rights and local laws of the municipality. During the legal trial, both the sides presented their views which were supported by proof and legal reasoning. The Hon’ble Court thoroughly examined pertinent laws related to municipalities, previous cases of the legal domain, and legal theories to make a decision that effectively tackled the legal complexities brought up in the case.
At the core of the legal conflict between the two entities, there was a major question of importance which stated whether the Municipal Committee had the legal authority and sanction to impose such taxes or not. This case of the Hon’ble Court has marked a significant evolution of Municipal law in the country in relation to the power of levying the taxes. Further, it offers a more comprehensive insight into the rights and the role which is demarcated for the Municipal Councils to follow by the statute.
Here the Court took note of the fact that the primary dispute had emerged when the Dhamangaon Municipal Committee increased the tax imposed even beyond the legislative limit and Bharat Kala Bhandar filed a suit to recover the same. In response, the Municipal Committee contested the right over the property used as a trust by the company and this sparked a series of legal battles.
The main challenge for the Court here was to determine whether the property in dispute fell within the Municipal Committee’s legal purview or not. The Court judiciously reviewed the laws and regulations to demarcate the Municipal Councils in the vicinity around their role and functioning in order to establish the real ownership over the trust property. Ultimately, with the help of the official records and maps, the affirmation that the disputed land fell within the municipality limits was established. Thereby, the Hon’ble Court had jurisdiction and the claim by the NAC was perceived to be false as the property was directly under the authority of the Municipal Committee, following legal regulations and their interpretations.
Also at the same time, it was scrutinised whether the Municipal Committee’s actions were consistent with their legal authority or was there a breach. The legal proceedings were conducted under the framework of the C.P. Berar Municipalities Act, 1922, which delineates the limits and areas of municipal jurisdiction and the procedure to be followed for filing a suit for an excess tax refund.
The Apex Court held that the Section 48 of the Municipalities Act, 1922, applies only when an act is constituted or purported within its ambit. The actions of the municipality in this case were concluded to not have been ‘purported to be done’ under the Act and it was held the public servant can only be said to have done or purported to act in order to discharge his/ her official duty if such official duty lies in the scope of the said act.
The Court held that the violation of the provisions of the Municipal Act by the local authority was not affected by the provisions of Section 67 or Section 84(3). The Constitution prohibits the State Legislature from imposing taxes on professions, trades, occupations and callings exceeding Rs. 250 crore per annum. If the local authority levied taxes exceeding the permissible amount after the prescribed date or after the commencement of the Constitution, it was beyond its jurisdiction as was in this case. Therefore, the Court concluded that the assessment could not enjoy the protection under the legal ambit of Section 84(3) of the Act.
The Court also took into notice the precedent case of Firm & Illuri Subbayya Chetty & Sons vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh (1963). Here the appellant had sued the State of Andhra Pradesh for a decree for a certain amount that was illegally recovered under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939 by them. The Hon’ble Court here ruled that the expression ‘any assessment made under this Act’ is wide enough to cover all assessments made by the appropriate authorities under the Act, regardless of their accuracy.
However, the Hon’ble Court while stating the difference between acts within official duty and acts prohibited by law quoted that, “Now I can understand it being said that an act which is within the scope of an official duty cannot be taken out of that category simply because it is carelessly or negligently performed, but I cannot see how an act which is expressly prohibited by law can be said to lie there. If a magistrate directed to supervise a sentence of whipping duly imposed by a competent Court has the wrong man whipped by mistake or imposes more lashes than warranted, I can understand him being protected. He is there acting within the scope of his duty. But if, instead of having the man whipped. he has him branded with a hot iron he would not, in my opinion, be able to claim the protection.”
Section 48 of the Act allows action to be taken against the Board or a person acting under it for anything done or to be purported under the Act. The next step is to assess the tax based on the tax liability of the individual. Section 71 of the Act here empowers the state government to make any rules that are required to regulate the tax assessment in their jurisdiction and prevent the offence of tax evasion far and wide. At the same time, the state government is empowered to make rules in order to regulate the collection of taxes in the state. In the case at hand however, the assessment of the taxes done by the NAC as well as the collection of taxes were deemed to not have been done in accordance with the 1949 Act as Section 73 of the Act requires notice to be given before commencing proceedings which were never delivered to the respondent.
Principles cited in the case
The case was based on various tenets of property law which have led to a concrete view of Indian property law regarding the principle of prescriptive rights and adverse possession over the property. This case therefore, renders a crucial source for conflicts when the land in question has two claimants of ownership in India. Further, the legal proceedings here have looked into the rules of law to be followed by the NAC on the subject of tax, land assessment, and administration. These rules provided the yardstick to measure the legality and procedural fairness of their actions.
The judgement passed in this suit had implications beyond those who were involved because it could be used as a reference point in future similar disputes. Therefore, the Court sought to set clear standards or guidelines through answering these legal questions with regard to the application of municipal laws and safeguarding property rights under such circumstances.
The fundamental principles of property law that govern prescriptive rights and adverse possession in India are:
Unbroken and continuous possession
The property’s possession must be of such a nature that it should not be interrupted and should be ongoing for a certain duration. The duration in India is deemed to be usually twelve years in order for one to secure prescriptive rights or adverse possession over the property. It basically means that the person should have control over the property for a long period of time, namely 12 years as per the property law of India and that such control should not have been disrupted by anyone.
Visible and public possession
There must be an apparent and conspicuous ownership claim over the property. Further, it must indicate that all parties are aware that someone is asserting their rights of ownership, enjoyment or possession over the disputed property. This means that the parties who are the real owner as well as the general public must have knowledge or awareness that the adverse owner is in possession of the property and utilising it for any use.
No legal right or claim at the start
The occupant which means the one who is enjoying the property must not have any legitimate claim or title to the property from the very beginning of their occupation over the property. The property here must belong to another party legally and the person enjoying possession must not have any real or apparent title to the property.
Desire to own the property
The one who is enjoying the property as his own must show a desire to own the property as its rightful owner. Further, this desire should be throughout the duration of their occupation over the property. The person utilising the property must have the desire to own the property and hold it as his own.
Fulfilment of tax or financial obligations
In order for a person to showcase their right to ownership over a property there must be payment of taxes or any financial obligations related to the property during the time it is owned by someone as proof. So, if such an obligation is fulfilled by the person then the person can claim to have the right over the property as these legal documents showcase the valid ownership of a property apart from the title deeds.
Enhancement or construction
The principle clearly lays down that if any sort of enhancements or constructions is done to the property by the person during their tenure then it will act as a claim over the property. Further, it will be seen by the court as a validation of their desire to claim it as their own. Therefore, if any such construction is done by the real owner then it will be seen as him still holding the property and its title. However, if it is done by the one enjoying and the owner does not intervene then it will be seen as the claim of the right is undisputed.
No response from the actual owner
The lack of a response from the actual owner while the property is in the possession of someone else can be seen as proof that they have agreed to the new owner’s claim, known as acquiescence or condonation.
Certainty in property deals and ownership
Maintaining certainty in property deals and ownership is essential to avoid conflicts and ensure stability and predictability in the real estate market.
Validity of physical control
The principle lays down the notion that acknowledging any sort of physical control over the property is typically more significant. When presented with both physical proof of ownership and a written proof like a title deed, it is the physical evidence which will be kept accountable in order to understand the genuine ownership, highlighting the importance of dependability and precision in matters of property. The Hon’ble Courts of India while deciding the matter of whether the real ownership exists in the matter or not, do not only look at the title deed but also keep in mind the fact as to who has had the physical control over the property for how long and whether it was disputed or not.
In the case, the Hon’ble Court looked into the matter that the physical control over the property was with Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. which acted as a determinant factor in them getting the apparent rights over the trust property.
Principle of excess authority
The principle of exceeding authority refers to the act of an organisation which goes beyond what is possible and allowed legally in the state. Here, the Municipal Committee of the state of Dhamangaon by putting forth excessive taxes on the companies dealing in the cotton industry had exceeded its legal authority.
This concept ensures that the rights laid down in the Constitution of India are not abridged merely because an authority took it upon itself to act in excess to the authority that is given to them by the law of the land. It helps in fundamentally limiting the powers of government and the authorities in such a way that they act only on the basis of the prescribed powers rather than forgoing the ambit and acting arbitrarily.
The Apex Court of India while pondering upon the principle of excess authority had stated that the NAC is only empowered to act in a way that it performs the duties which are necessary for the welfare and functioning of the citizens and not conflict with the interest of the general public. In summary, if any power is given to a local government by the ambit of its authorising law then such power must be strictly used and conferred within its boundaries or as clearly implied from the authorising law. If this is not followed, then it will be deemed that the power be considered beyond its legal authority and therefore, it will stand invalid.
Legal compliance
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India here examined if the Municipal Committee had adhered to all essential legal procedures and protocols while they were in the transit of the decision-making process in relation to the taxation. The rule of adhering to legal procedures holds the paramount amount of importance and it involves the factor which ensures that all necessary legal steps and regulations are followed in a particular legal matter or dispute. This includes the act of adhering to the relevant laws, regulations, and procedures established by the Court in order to ensure fairness and protect the rights of the citizens.
In this specific case at hand it was seen that adhering to legal procedures and compliance with legality is important as when the notice was not sent by the appellant to the respondent in the pre-trial stages of the proceeding, the Court held it to be a breach of their legal right. Moreover, the judicial decision held that there must be legal compliance in regard to the tax assessment and that it needs to be done according to the provision of law established in the statute.
Principle of natural justice
The principle of natural justice means that there should be just and fair treatment and that the decision of the Hon’ble Courts should be achieved by keeping in mind the two cardinal principles of law. These two principles are-
- no man shall be condemned unheard, whose legal maxim states, audi alteram partem in Latin;
- to judge without bias, which is stated as, nemo iudex in causa sua in Latin.
The rule of fair hearing basically means that no one should be condemned unheard. The principle states that every individual is empowered with the right to be heard before their significant rights are taken away from them or before they have charges placed on them. They should be allowed to plead their own case and this hearing principle is deemed as a mandate in the principle of natural justice.
In the context of this case, the duty of the Bharat Kala Kendra was to send a legal notice to the NAC before filing a suit against them in the court of law. However, since they never approached the municipal committee and directly took to the stand in order to plead their case, they did not present the municipality with the right to be heard. If they had delivered the notice to the committee then it would have been the duty of the committee to supply a reply within 2 weeks and that would have ensured that they were heard.
Further, the second cardinal principle of no one to a judge in their own case, is present in the ambit of law to remove biasness. It practically bars the person who stands as accused or is affiliated with the commission of the offence or even if they have any interest in the judgement of the case to take over the trial as a judge. In other words, it puts a notion of impartiality into place which prohibits the person having any sort of self-interest from being the deciding authority in the matter.
Analysis of Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. vs. Municipal Committee, Dhamangao, (1966)
In the legal dispute of Dhamangaon, the appellants were involved in a dispute over payment of taxes under the Central Provincial and Municipal Governments Act, 1922. Initially, the appellants paid taxes at certain rates prescribed by law which was within the ambit of law. However, on a proposition by the NAC a higher rate of taxes were taken by the companies involved in commercial activities but this was done in excess of the power of the Municipal Committee.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court here ruled in the favour of the appellants and declared that they were entitled to a refund on the taxes overpaid by them within three years of filing the suit as it was their right under the ambit of the law. The main issue at hand was whether the tax rate which exceeded the permissible limits charged from the companies made the tax collection entirely void or simply irregular for the period of 3 years.
The tax that was charged for the period of 3 years was illegal in the very nature of it. The tax was already exceeding the limits that were set by the State and the Central authorities to a large extent. Further, the tax levied on the commercial actors in the cotton industry was deemed as unlawful since it was unconstitutionally collected. This case helped in establishing the due process of law and holding up that the power of the municipalities in the collection of taxes cannot be arbitrary in nature.
Further, on the issue of property law and adverse possession, the judgement clearly laid out the principles of adverse possession as uninterrupted and continuous possession of land whereby the occupant enjoys the property and has a motive to take over the property. Here the owner should be aware of the property being used by another but if he/she does not interfere nor put any claim for 12 years then, the Court after looking at the facts of the cases can ascertain whether it is a case of adverse possession or not.
Conclusion
The issues of the case are complex in nature and deal with the ambits of tax imposition and jurisdictional matters between property owners and municipal authorities is well defined by the Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. vs. Municipal Committee, Dhamangaon case. In this significant judicial pronouncement by the Supreme Court of India, the Hon’ble Court has sided with Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. Hereby, the court had validated their ability to pursue the legal measures in order to reclaim any excessive tax payments if collected by the authorities and which has been caused due to unauthorised power use that exceeds the lawful boundaries.
The importance of this ruling primarily resides in its elucidation of the limits of power of the municipal corporations and in the ambit of safeguarding the fair taxation rights of the citizens. By setting a legal precedent in the matter of excessive taxation, the Court had fundamentally declared that if there is any exceeding imposition of taxes without the explicit permission of the authorities then it will be deemed as invalid and an act without jurisdiction.
This decision has underscored the fundamental principle that the municipal entities should always operate within the boundaries that are already established by the statutory provisions and the Constitution of India. This will guarantee that the actions of the authorities are neither capricious nor illegal and that the citizen’s rights are not harmed in any way. In conclusion, the case is a judgement of paramount importance by the Supreme Court of India that has upheld the rights of property owners and taxation matters and strengthened the principle of legal liability and upheld the welfare of the citizens.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Why is the judgement in the present case deemed to be an important precedent?
The judgement has helped uphold that the local authorities like the municipalities need to follow the legal limits that are laid out in the law to be followed while levying taxes. The ruling makes it fundamentally clear that if any sort of tax is levied beyond the permissible limits of law then such a tax is void and impermissible. This basically helps in protecting the rights of property owners and in this case, helps the commercial players by protecting them from the excessive taxes imposed on them.
What did the Supreme Court emphasise in the present judgement?
The Hon’ble Court emphasised on the need and importance of interpreting the statutory provisions and following the procedure of tax assessment and levying as prescribed by the law. The Court held that the interpretation should be done in such a way that they remain consistent with the constitutional principles and the welfare of citizens is not done away with. This is to be done so as to not infringe on the fundamental rights of any individual or even the community at large. Further, emphasis was laid on following the due process of law and upholding the rule of law in all regards so as to ensure that there is no arbitrary use of power while levying taxes.
What is the impact of the decision of the court on the rights of the other owners and their properties?
The Court’s decision was a landmark verdict as it gave way to the rights of the property owners. It not only allowed them the right to affirm their legal ownership over the property but also provided them with the opportunity of being able to challenge the arbitrariness against the NAC. This further empowered them with the right to seek redressal in cases where the amount of taxes being imposed on them was excessive.
Who constituted the bench in the present case?
The bench, comprising Justice Mudholkar, Justice Raghubar Dayal, Justice Subba Rao, Justice Bachawat, and Justice Ramaswami comprised the jury in the case of Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. vs. Municipal Committee, Dhamangao, (1966).
References
