P L D 1962 (W (PLP)
Mst. SARTAJ BEGUM‑Petitioner Versus KARACHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1962 (W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Inamullah and Anwarul Haq, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. SARTAJ BEGUM‑Petitioner Versus KARACHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1962 (W (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1962 (W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Inamullah and Anwarul Haq, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1962 (W (PLP) (Mst. SARTAJ BEGUM‑Petitioner Versus KARACHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Z. C. Valliani for Petitioner.
- Fazle Haq for Respondent.
- Dates of hearing : 16th and 23rd January 1962.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Writ‑Point not raised in lower Courts‑Cannot be allowed to be raised at hearing of writ petition‑Constitution of Pakistan (1956), Art. L70. (b) Karachi Municipal Corporation Rules, Ch. 11, Sch. VIII, r. 7 (1)‑Amendment made in assessment list can be given retrospective effect.
Judgment & Decree
INAMULLAH, J.‑In Writ Petition No. 345 of 1960 Mr. Vallani adopted the argument of Mr. Dingomal and further urged that the notice for enhancement of the assessment was given by the Municipal Commissioner on the 30th December, 1957. The tax could not be enhanced, it was contended, with retrospective effect from 1st April, 1957. The notice in question reads as under :‑ "Please show cause within a month of the receipt of this notice as to why the assessment of the above plot may not be enhanced or raised under sub‑rule (1), Rule 7, Schedule VIII, Chapter 11 of the K. M. C. Rules from Rs. 1,170 to Rs. 5,270 with effect from 1‑4‑1957." Mr. Vallani relied on rule 7 (I) of Chapter II of Schedule VIII of the Municipal Corporation Rules. It runs as under :‑ "7 (1) The Chief Officer may at any time amend the list by inserting the name of any person whose name ought to have been inserted, or by including any land or building which ought to have been included, or by altering the assessment on any land or building which has been erroneously valued or assessed through fraud, accident or mistake, or of which the rent has been raised, since the date of assessment, after giving notice to the person interested in the amendment of a time, not less than one month from the date of service of such notice, at which the amendment is to be made."
2. In the first place this point had not been raised in the petition. It has also not been raised either before the Municipal Authorities or before the Small Causes Court Judge. It has been raised only at the time of argument. In the second place, the very fact that the Act provides that the assessment list can be amended would show that the amendment can be given retrospective effect. If a mistake has occurred in the assessment it is to be rectified. The very fact that the mistake has to be corrected would mean that in order that it should be given effect to it will have to be retrospective.
3. I would, for the reasons given in the Writ Petition No. 313 of 1959, and for the reasons given above dismiss the petition with costs. I would certify that it is a fit case for appeal to the Supreme Court. ANWARUL HAQ, J.‑I agree. Petition dismissed.