Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Punjab Municipal Act, 1911

33 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

SODAN SINGH ETC. ETC.versusNEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE & ANR. ETC.

1989 INSC 26030 August 1989Disposed off

The petitioners, a group of hawkers, claimed a constitutional right under Article 19(1)(g) to occupy specific spots on Delhi's public pavements for street trading, alleging that the municipal authorities' refusal violated their rights under Articles 19 and 21. The respondents argued that no exclusive right to occupy pa

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, LUDHIANA AND ANR.versusBALINDER BACHAN SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2004 INSC 32428 April 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana notified a Town Planning Scheme under Section 192(2) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, which incorporated land belonging to the deceased Rajinder Kaur. She objected, and the scheme was modified to reserve 25% of the area, including 3.16 kanals, as open space for a public park. After

INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETYversusNEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE AND ORS.

2003 INSC 26328 April 2003Dismissed

The Indian Red Cross Society owned a building in Delhi, part of which it occupied for its charitable offices and the rest it let out on rent. The New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) levied property tax on the entire building. The Society claimed exemption under Section 62(1) of the New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994,

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusBHAJAN SINGH AND ANR.

2001 INSC 12227 February 2001Dismissed

The respondent, Bhabhan Singh, was elected President of a municipal council in Samrala, Punjab, but the State Government failed to publish a notification of his election as required by Section 24(2) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. The Principal Secretary also issued a show‑cause notice and later a notification remov

THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusNARANJAN DASS DOOMRA RICE AND GEN. MILLS AND ORS. ETC.

1997 INSC 75925 November 1997Dismissed

During President's Rule in Punjab, the President of India issued an order exempting raw cotton, narma and oilseeds from octroi and directing municipal committees to impose an Urban Development Cess on these items. The State of Punjab issued a memo to municipal bodies, the cess was levied and collected, and the affected

TARLOCHAN DEV SHARMAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2001 INSC 30925 July 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Tarlochan Dev Sharma, was the elected President of Rajpura Municipality and was removed under Section 22 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 on the ground of "abuse of his powers" for allegedly withholding payment for a fogging machine. He contended that the machine was defective, that his decision was mad

N.D.M.C.versusSTATESMAN LTD.

1989 INSC 32024 October 1989Directions issued

The New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC) rejected revised building plans of Statesman Ltd. on fire‑safety grounds, particularly the provision of refuge areas and the absence of a pedestrian walk‑way and podium required by zoning plans. The Delhi Urban Art Commission and the Chief Fire Officer cleared the plans, and the

M/S. SEPAL HOTEL PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2014 INSC 30922 April 2014Disposed off

The Municipal Committee framed a Town Planning Scheme in 1975 that required part of Sepal Hotel's land for a road. The hotel owner was served notice to demolish the boundary wall, leading to multiple writ petitions and civil suits. The High Court held the scheme final, but the Supreme Court’s decision in Yogender Pal d

DEWAN DAULAT RAI KAPOOR ETC. ETC.versusNEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE & ANOTHER ETC. ETC.

1979 INSC 27220 December 1979Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court considered three appeals challenging house‑tax assessments of buildings that were subject to the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, but for which no standard rent had been fixed. The revenue argued that the landlord could reasonably expect to receive the contractual rent and that this should determine the

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCILversusP.P. GARG AND ANR.

2007 INSC 16420 February 2007Dismissed

The respondents were initially recruited as Mechanics (Auto) in the Auto Workshop of the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and were paid under the Shiv Shankar Committee pay scale, which applied to the Electrical Wing. They were later promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (E & M), and NDMC contended that this pos

M/S. HINDUSTAN GUM & CHEMICALS LTD.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

1985 INSC 18019 August 1985Dismissed

Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd. challenged the levy of octroi by the Bhiwani Municipal Committee after its factory was brought within municipal limits by a 1965 notification under the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, relying on Section 5(4) of the Act, but the Supreme Court in Atla

S. L. KAPOORversusJAGMOHAN & ORS.

1980 INSC 18418 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The Lt. Governor of Delhi superseded the New Delhi Municipal Committee under Section 238(1) of the Punjab Municipal Act, alleging incompetence, default and abuse of power. Two non‑official members of the Committee challenged the order, contending that they were not given any opportunity to be heard on the allegations.

SHIELA KAUSHISHversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI

1981 INSC 14218 August 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Shiela Kaushish, a taxpayer, constructed a warehouse in Delhi and let it out to the American Embassy under several leases, eventually receiving a total rent of Rs.34,797 per month from April 1968. For the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71, the Income‑Tax Officer treated the actual rent received as the "annual value"

ATLAS CYCLE INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

1992 INSC 34517 December 1992Dismissed

The petitioners, Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd. and another, challenged the levy of octroi on their factories after the Sonepat municipal limits were extended, arguing that Section 5(4) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (as amended) was unconstitutional for denying them a right of representation and for its retrospective

NEW DELHI MUNTCIPAL COMMITTEEversusALLIED MOTORS PVT LTD. AND ORS.

1995 INSC 63217 October 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. displayed eight neon sign boards showing the names of the commodities it sold. The New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC) demanded advertisement tax on these signs. The Delhi High Court Single Judge held the signs were advertisements and dismissed the petition, but the Letters Patent Bench reverse

RAJINDER KUMAR BANSAL & ORSversusMUNICIPAL COMMITTEE & ORS.

2021 INSC 40517 August 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned land originally leased to Louis Club for club purposes, on which a pavilion was constructed and later sub‑let to another club and partially transferred to a Municipal Committee. The landlord filed an ejectment petition alleging non‑payment of rent, unauthorised sub‑letting and change of use. The High

BHAGWANT RAI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS

1995 INSC 47217 August 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants owned a house in Sangrur that was assessed for the 1987‑88 year at a rateable value of Rs 1,50,472.50, calculated on the basis of the actual rent of Rs 12,687 per month received from the State Bank of India, after deductions under s.3(1)(b) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. The respondents argued that t

YOGENDRA PAL AND OTHERSversusMUNICIPALITY, BHATINDA AND ANR.

1994 INSC 26115 July 1994Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of Sections 192(1)(c) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 and 203(1)(c) of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973, which allowed municipal committees to transfer land for town‑planning schemes without payment of compensation or with discretionary compensation. Petitioners whose land had b

MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE SIRHINDversusPARSHOTAM DASS AND ORS.

1996 INSC 25615 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, who were the khewatdars of land classified as “Shamlat deh” in village Brahman Majra, claimed that the land reverted to them after the Gram Sabha was abolished, invoking Rule 3 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Rules, 1965. The Municipal Committee of Sirhind argued that the land had vested in it when a noti

DELHI GOLF CLUB LTD. AND ANR.versusN.D.M.C.

2001 INSC 2415 January 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Golf Club Ltd., a limited company, held a 20‑year temporary lease of government land for operating a golf club, with the lease expressly stating that any continuance beyond the term would also be temporary and that construction required government permission. The New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC) demanded

M/S. GOBIND PERSHAD JAGDISH PERSHADversusNEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE

1993 INSC 22814 July 1993Dismissed After

The appellant owned a shop with a verandah that formed a continuous passage used by the public in Connaught Circus, New Delhi. The New Delhi Municipal Committee, invoking Section 171(4) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, declared the verandah and similar ones as "public streets" for public safety and convenience. The a

BALDEV SINGH GANDHIversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS .

2002 INSC 8114 February 2002Appeal(s) allowed

Baldev Singh Gandhi, an elected municipal councillor, publicly criticised the house‑tax assessment list prepared by the Municipal Council of Jandiala Guru, using pamphlets, loud‑speakers and inviting taxpayers to discuss grievances. The Punjab State Government claimed his actions caused difficulty in tax collection and

DR. BALBIR SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION, DELHI AND ORS.

1984 INSC 23512 December 1984Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined challenges by several property owners against assessments made by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. The core issue was how to determine the rateable value of four categories of properties – self‑occupied, par

N.D.M.CversusSATISH CHAND (DECEASED) BY LR. RAM CHAND

2003 INSC 47211 September 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC) assessed property tax on a basement owned by Satish Chand, who argued that the basement was unusable due to water ingress and therefore had no rateable value. Chand filed a civil suit seeking a permanent injunction against the tax demand. NDMC raised a preliminary objection, inv

CHIEF COMMISSIONER, UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARHversusJANGI LAL JAIN AND ANR. ETC.

1996 INSC 11688 October 1996Dismissed

The case arose from a Punjab & Haryana High Court decision that the delegation of power to levy property tax to the Chief Administrator of the Union Territory of Chandigarh under the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 (as amended) exceeded legislative competence and violated the Constitution. The

R.D. GUPTA & ORS. ETC.versusLT. GOVERNOR. DELHI ADMN. & ORS. ETC.

1987 INSC 2007 August 1987Directions issued

The New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC) treated its non‑technical (ministerial) staff as a unified cadre, but granted higher Shiv Shankar Committee (SS) pay scales and ex‑gratia payments only to those posted in its electricity wing, citing the pattern followed by the Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking (DESU). Staff

NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE NANGAL TOWNSHIPversusBHAKRA MANAGEMENT BOARD, CHANDIGARH AND ORS.

1999 INSC 3044 August 1999Dismissed

The Bhakra Management Board constructed a series of separate bungalows for its employees in Nangal township. The Notified Area Committee began treating each row of adjoining bungalows as a single "building" for house‑tax purposes, applying a 15% tax rate based on the combined annual rental value. The Board argued that

SODAN SINGHversusN.D.M.C. AND ORS.

1998 INSC 644 February 1998Disposed off

The Supreme Court dealt with a public‑interest litigation concerning the allocation of hawker and squatter sites within the New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC) area. The Court examined the objections raised by NDMC to the inclusion of 33 sites in the Thareja Committee’s report and whether the Committee’s recommendatio

RAM KRISHAN MAHAJANversusUNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH AND ORS.

2007 INSC 7253 July 2007Dismissed

The Chandigarh Administration issued notifications under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire lands in Mani Majra for Scheme Nos.2 and 3, which the petitioners challenged on the ground that the acquisition was not for a "building scheme" under Section 192 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. The Supreme

STATE TRADING CORPN. INDIA LTD.versusNEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

2016 INSC 1253 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the method of fixing the rateable value of lands and buildings under Section 63 of the New Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1994. The appellant, State Trading Corporation, argued that the High Court erred by relying on Bye‑law 12 of the old Punjab Municipal Act to assess rent, especially for

ATMA SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

1981 INSC 802 April 1981Dismissed

The State of Punjab, under the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, notified the inclusion of eight local areas into Sunam Municipality. A stay order was later placed on this notification, preventing the areas from being officially added. Despite the stay, the State, compelled by a statutory deadline, held municipal elections o

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2000 INSC 5651 December 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) challenged an order by the Municipal Committee of Sangrur, Punjab, that amended the assessment list and increased property tax on its godown. The amendment was effected under Section 67 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, based on a notice that the corporation alleged was vague, lacki

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search