Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2006 YLR 577
Court / Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court
Year of Decision: 2005
Decision Date: 2005-11-25
Parties: ABDUL RAZAK vs EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CANTONMENT BOARD OF CLIFTON and otherss
This judicial decision was delivered by the Sindh High Court on 2005-11-25. The matter involves proceedings between ABDUL RAZAK and EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CANTONMENT BOARD OF CLIFTON and otherss, officially reported as 2006 YLR 577. The court reviewed applicable Pakistani statutes, procedural requirements, and governing case-law authorities. The full text below contains the complete facts, arguments, and legal reasoning rendered by the honorable bench.
Case cited as 2006 YLR 577
Court Name: Sindh High Court Judge(s): Sajjad Ali Shah, Muhammad Mujeebullah Siddiqui Title:ABDUL RAZAK vs EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CANTONMENT BOARD OF CLIFTON and
otherss Case No.: C.P. No.D-181 of 2005 Date of Judgment:2005-11-25 Reported As: 2006 YLR 577 Result: Order accordingly Judgment ORDER ' The petitioner Abdul Razak is aggrieved with the demand notice for recovery of property tax at Rs.74,865 for the period from the year, 1991 to the years, 2004. ' It is stated in the petition that Flat No.B-4, IInd Flcior, on Plot No.G-17/B-III, (Al-Habib Garden) Clifton, Karachi, was purchased by his mother Mst. Shafiat Bano, who has expired and the petitioner is her legal heir. It was purchased on 28th of June, 1990, and thereafter the house tax was not assessed. The main objection of the petitioner is that the house tax cannot be recovered for more than three years for the first time in one go. ' During the course of proceedings, the petitioner who is appearing in person has contended that while imposing house tax the provisions contained in Chapter-V of the Cantonment Act, 1924, have not been complied with. He has however, no objection to the recovery of house tax at the annual rental value of Rs.51,000 for three years namely, 2002, 2003 and 2004. ' We have heard the petitioner/ Advocate in person and Mr. Sohail H.K. Rana, Advocate for the respondents Nos. 1 and 2. The record has been produced before us and we have found that the compliance of the relevant provisions in Chapter-V of the Cantonment Act, 1924, relating to the imposition of taxation have not been made. ' A perusal of the file shows that the notice under section 68 of the Cantonment Act, 1924 has not been served on the petitioner, who is the occupier and legal heir of the owner Mst. Shafiat Bano. ' Since the petitioner is prepared to pay house tax for three years as narrated above, therefore, the petition is disposed of in the following terms:-
---
## Page 2
"(1) That the Cantonment Board, Clifton shall issue a demand notice to the petitioner for the period of the three years i.e. 2002, 2003 and 2004 within 15 days from today and the petitioner shall pay the same. (2) So far, the contention that the house tax cannot be recovered for more than three years, we have not been shown any provision in this behalf and consequently, this contention is not accepted. (3) For the earlier years the Cantonment Board, Clifton shall be at liberty to initiate the proceedings strictly in accordance with law as contained in Chapter-V of the Cantonment Act, 1924. Likewise, if the assessm ent is revised it shall be done strictly in accordance with the provisions contained in Chapter-V of the Cantonment Act, 1924. Without complying with the provisions of Chapter-V of the Cantonment Act, 1924, the Cantonment Board, Clifton shall not recovery any house tax from the petitioner for the period prior to the year, 2002."