B. J. DIVAN, P. D. DESAI, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner in each of these Special Civil Applications is the Municipal Corporation of the City of Baroda and each of these Special Civil Applications has been filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution challenging the order of the learned Assistant Judge Baroda in taxation appeal matters. The common feature of each of this group of matters is that irk each case the second opponent concerned being the owner of the property has got several distinct buildings though standing on one and the same plot of land and the question is whether under the provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act 1949 it was open to the Municipal authorities to add up together the rateable values of each of these properties for the purpose of assessment to municipal taxes. We will take up the facts in Special Civil Application No. 118 of 1971 as those facts are tpyical of the facts in the rest of the cases. ( 2 ) THE second respondent in Special Civil Application No. 118 of 1971 is a Limited Company and has constructed premises and a number of buildings near its factory. These premises and buildings are given on license basis by the Limited Company to the members of its staff. The Municipal Corporation assessed all the said buildings and premises collectively and the Limited Company objected stating that all these buildings and premises should not have been assessed in one group and that a separate bill for each building should have been issued. An appeal under the provisions of the Municipal Act was presented to the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Baroda putting forward its contention against the totalling up of the rateable value of all the buildings simply on the ground that they were situated on one and the same plot of land. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) accepted the contentions of the second respondent Company and by his judgment and order set aside the bills. He also directed that the Municipal Corporation shall assess the annual letting value of each of the units separately and shall issue the tax notices accordingly. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) accepted the contentions of the second respondent Company and by his judgment and order set aside the bills. He also directed that the Municipal Corporation shall assess the annual letting value of each of the units separately and shall issue the tax notices accordingly. Against this decision of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) the matter was taken up in appeal before the District Court Baroda by the Municipal Corporation and the learned Assistant Judge Baroda who heard the appeal ultimately dismissed the appeal with costs. The present Special Civil Application has been preferred against this judgment and order of the learned Assistant Judge. ( 3 ) IT may be pointed out that in this particular group of cases we are concerned with the provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act 1949 and we will therefore refer to the relevant provisions of that Act. Sec. 2 sub-sec. (5) lays down an inclusive definition of the word building and according to that definition building includes a house out-house stable shed hut and other enlosure or structure whether of masonry bricks wood mud metal or any other material whatever whether used as a human dwelling or otherwise and also includes verandahs fixed platforms plinths doorsteps walls including compound walls and fencing and the like. Under sec. 2 sub-sec. (28-A) industrial premises means premises including the precincts thereof in any part of which a manufacturing process is being carried on or is ordinarily carried on. Sec. 2 sub-sec. (46) defines the word premises as including messuages buildings and lands of any tenure whether open or enclosed whether built on or not and whether public or private. Sec. 2 sub-sec. (49) defines property tax to mean a tax on buildings and lands in the City. Under sec. 2 sub-sec. (30) land includes land which is being built upon or is built upon or covered with water benefits to arise out of land things attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth and rights created by legislative enactment over any street. Sec. 2 sub-sec. (53) defines rack rent to mean the amount of the annual rent for which the premises with reference to which the term is used might reasonably be expected to let from year to year as ascertained for the purpose of fixing the rateable value of such premises. Under sec. Sec. 2 sub-sec. (53) defines rack rent to mean the amount of the annual rent for which the premises with reference to which the term is used might reasonably be expected to let from year to year as ascertained for the purpose of fixing the rateable value of such premises. Under sec. 2 subsec. (54) rateable value means the value of any building or land fixed whether with reference to any given premises or otherwise in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules for the purpose of assessment to property taxes and under sec. 2 sub-sec. (1a) annual letting value means the annual rent for which any building or land or premises exclusive of furniture or machinery contained or situate therein or thereon might reasonably be expected to let from year to year with reference to its use and shall include all payments made or agreed to be made to the owner by a person (other than the owner) occupyiny the building or land or premises on account of occupation taxes insurance or other charges incidental thereto. Sec. 127 of the Act provides that for the purposes of the Act the Corporation shall impose inter alia property taxes. Under sec. 129 property taxes shall comprise the taxes mentioned therein namely a water tax a conservancy tax and a general tax. We are not concerned with betterment charges so far as the present case is concerned. Sec. 130 deals with water tax sec. 127 with conservancy tax and on what premises it shall be levied and sec. 132 with general tax. Under sec. 453 the Rules in Schedule A as amended from time to time shall be deemed to be part of the Act. Under sec. 454 the Corporation may add to Schedule A rules not inconsistant with the provisions of the Act (which expression shall in this section be deemed not to include the said Schedule A) to provide for any matter dealt with or for any of the purposes specified in the said Schedule A and may subject to the same limitations amend alter or annul any rule in the said Schedule A. Under sec. 455 the power to make add to or alter or rescind any rule under sec. 454 shall be subject to the condition of the rules being made after previous publication. All rules made under sec. 455 the power to make add to or alter or rescind any rule under sec. 454 shall be subject to the condition of the rules being made after previous publication. All rules made under sec. 454 shall be finally published in the Official Gazette and shall thereupon have effect as if enacted in the Act. In addition to the publication in the Official Gazette the Corporation may determine in each case what further publication if any is required for rules made or proposed to be made. Schedule A to the Act contains different rules as contemplated by sec. 453 and Chapter VIII of Schedule A contains Taxation Rules. We are concerned in the present case with Rules 7 9 and 11. Under Rule 7 in respect of industrial premises and in respect of any other premises which the Commissioner may decide to treat as one property having regard to the nature of the premises and the use or uses to which they are put or are capable of being put the rateable value of the buildings and land comprised in such premises shall be determined premises-wise For the purpose of fixing the rateable value different parts of any premises may be valued according to their use. In order to fix the rateable value of any building or land or premises assessable to a property tax there shall be deducted from the amount of the annual rent for which such building land or premises might reasonably be expected to let from year to year a sum equal to ten per cent of the said annual rent and the said deduction shall be in lieu of all allowances for repairs or on any other account whatever. Rule 9 provides for keeping of an assessment hook by the Commissioner and sets out in detail what should be contained in the assessment book. Rule 11 is in these terms : 11 (1) When any building or land or premises is let to two or more persons holding in severalty the Commissioner may for the purpose of assessing such building or land or premises to the property taxes either treat the whole thereof as one property or with the written consent of the owner of such building or land or premises treat each several holding therein or any two or more of such several holdings together or each floor or flat as a separate property. (2) When the Commissioner has determined to treat all the several holdings comprised within any one building or land or premises under this section as one property he may subject to any general conditions which may from time to time be prescribed by the Standing Committee in this behalf at any time not later than seven days before the first day of any halfyear for which an instalment of general tax will be leviable in respect of the said property sanction a drawback of one-fifth part of the general tax so leviable. (3) Every person who applies for a drawback under sub-rule (2) shall furnish to the Commissioner full and correct information regarding the property in respect of which the claim for drawback is made and the several holdings comprised therein in such form and with such particulars as may be required by the Commissioner in accordance with the general conditions prescribed in this behalf by the Standing Committee. Now we are concerned in this group of Special Civil Applications with several buildings each distinct in itself situated on one plot of land. It is no ones case that any particular building is let to two or more persons in this group of matters. What is let out by the owner of the property is each separate building by itself and the land on which the building stands also forms part of the tenancy or is governed by the license as the case might be. It is no doubt true that the word land in the definition section as we have pointed out above includes land which is being built upon or is built upon but it must not be forgotten that the building as such is each individual building and it is no ones case so far as these facts are concerned that any particular building owned by the same owner is let to two or more persons. The material words this section in our opinion in are any building. The material words this section in our opinion in are any building. The material words of Rule 7 have also to be borne in mind and these words are that for the purpose of determining the rateable value in respect of other premises that is in respect of premises other than industrial premises which the Commissioner may decide to treat as one property having regard to the nature of the premises and the use or uses to which they are put or are capable of being put the rateable value of the buildings and lands comprised in such premises shall be determined premises-wise. We are not concerned in the present case with industrial premises and under sec. 2 sub-sec. (46) as pointed out above premises includes buildings. Therefore Rule 7 requires that the Commissioner must decide to treat premises other than industrial premises as one property having regard to the nature of the premises and the use or uses to which they are put or are capable of being put. It is therefore clear when one reads Rule 7 with Rule 11 that there must be a letting out of any building or premises to two or more persons and it is only when there is such letting to two or more persons holding in severalty that the Commissioner gets the power under Rule 11 to treat either the whole property as one property or with the written consent of the owner of such building or land or premises to treat each several holding therein or any two or more of such several holdings together or each floor or flat as a separate property. In our opinion since each building under consideration in this group of cases is a separate building by itself and a separate premises by itself it is not possible for us to hold that the Commissioner had the power to treat all these different buildings as one unit for taxation purposes by grossing up the annual rental value of each of those buildings. Of course; if there are outhouses stable etc. Of course; if there are outhouses stable etc. attached to one particular building they will all be considered as one building for the purpose of assessing and fixing of the annual letting value but when there are several houses given to different individuals each separate from the other by a wire fencing it cannot be said that they are one building and the power of the Municipal Commissioner to gross annual letting value under Rule 11 can only arise when one and the same building is let to two or more persons. Under these circumstances the conclusion arrived at by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Baroda and the learned Assistant Judge Baroda was correct and it must be held that the Commissioner was not entitled to total up the rateable value or annual letting value of each of these buildings Just because they belonged to the same owner and were situated on on and the same plot of land. ( 4 ) THESE Special Civil Applications therefore fail and rule is discharged in each matter with costs-only so far as contesting respondents are concerned and no order as to costs where there is no contest. .