MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ANR. versus SHRI NARESH KUMAR AND ORS.

Citation: [1997] 2 S.C.R. 869 · Decided: 10-03-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. JEEVAN REDDY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

... 
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ANR. 
A 
v. 
SHRI NARESH KUMAR AND ORS. 
MARCH 10, 1997. 
[B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND K.S. PARIPOORNAN, JJ.] 
B 
Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957: Section 115 ( 4) ( c ). 
Expression 
"Dwelling 
houses"-Scope 
of-General 
Tax-Levy 
of-Held : Dwelling houses siruated on, o-.er or in the midst of agricultural C 
lands, not exempt from general t~17iat such dwelling house was occupied 
only occasionally .and only for purposes connected with agriculrural opera-
tions, immaterial. 
'Dwelling houses ''-Treatment of land adjacent to-As integral part 
thereof-For levy of general tax-Held : Such appurtenant land as was D 
necessary for proper and convenient enjoyment of the dwelling house should 
be so treated--The extent of such appurtenant land is a question of fact to be 
decided in each case. 
Agricultural land-Held : Whether a particular land was agiicullllral 
land or not was a mixed question off act and law to be decided in the facts E 
and circumstances of each case. · 
Words and Phrases : 
"Dwelling house", "house" and "Fam1 house''-Meaning of-ln the con-
text of S. 115 (4)(c) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. 
The respondent was the owner of a piece of land on which he carried 
on agricultural operations. The respondent constructed a building on the 
said land, which was occupied by him not on a permanent basis but only 
occasionally for purposes connected with agricultural operations. 
The appellant-Corporation levied general tax on the said building 
under Section 115 (4)(c) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. 
The respondent filed a writ petition before the High Court contending that 
F 
G 
the said building despite being a "dwelling house" was exempt from the 
general tax under Section 115 (4)(c) of the Act. The High Court allowed H 
869 
870 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
f 1997] 2 S.C.R. 
A the petition holding that the exemption applied even to buildings or farm 
houses used substantially, if not solely, for agricultural purposes. Hence 
this appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
B 
HELD: 1.1. Section 115 (4)(c) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation 
Act, 1957 excludes "dwelling houses" from the purview of agricultural lands. 
and buildings. Once it is a "dwelling house" it is outside the purview of 
exempted category. The very context in which the expression "dwelling 
houses" occurs shows that even the dwelling houses situated on, over or in 
C the midst of agricultural lands were sought to be excluded from the 
exempted category of "agricultural lands and buildings". A dwelling house 
can also be occupied by persons carrying on agriculture i.e., to carry on 
or supervise the agricultural operation. But according to Section 115 
(4)(c), the "dwelling house" as such are excluded from the category of 
agricultural. buildings. Even if it is possible to say that a dwelling house 
D in an "Agricultural building'', yet it is excluded specifically by the statute 
from the fold of agricultural buildings. The High Court erred in holding 
that the exemption applied even to 'buildings' or farm houses used 
'substantially', if not solely, for agricultural purpo§es. Application of the 
test evolved by the High Court would remove the distinction between ' 
E "Agricultural buildings" and "dwelling houses" which are mentioned 
together in Section 115 (4)(c). (872-G-H, 873-A-B] 
F 
1.2. The respondent's argument of occasional (as compared to 
regular) occupation has no force, as it is not necessary that a house if 
adapted for residential purposes should be actually dwelt in. (873-F] 
Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd. v. The Gram Panchayat, 
Pimpri Waghere, [1976] 4 SSC 177, relied on. 
Daniel v. Coulsting, 135 ER 53, cited. 
G 
2. Such appurtenant land as is necessary for a proper and con-
venient enjoyment of the dwelling house should be treated as an integral 
part of the dwelling house for levy of general tax. The extent of such 
appurtenant land is a question of fact to be decided in each case. (874-A] 
3. Whether a particular land is an agricultural land or not is a mixed 
H question of fact and law to be decided in the facts and circumstances of 
._,,,-· 
M.C.D. v. NARESH KR [B.P. JEEV AN REDDY, J.] 
871 
each case. [87 4-C] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1834 of 
1997. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 2.12.94 of the Delhi High Court 
A 
in C.W.P. No. 937 of 1994. 
B 
Ms. Madhu Tewatia and Ranbir Y adav for the Appellants. 
Mukul Mudgal
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.