Separate residential units remain distinct buildings for house tax, even when adjoining quarters share common walls.

A separate residential quarter or bungalow used as an independent dwelling for an employee and his family remains a distinct "building" for house-tax purposes under the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. Common walls or other shared structural features do not justify treating adjoining units as one composite building, because the statutory meaning of "building" covers each house used for human habitation. The assessment authority cannot expand that meaning merely to increase revenue, and clubbing separate residential units for house-tax assessment is impermissible.

---

---

Issues: Whether each separate residential quarter or bungalow in a row, occupied by different employees and having a common wall with adjoining units, constituted a separate "building" for the purpose of levying house tax under the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, or whether the entire block could be clubbed and assessed as one building.

Analysis: The definition of "building" in Clause (2) of Section 3 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 was read to include any house used for human habitation. Each quarter or bungalow was an independent dwelling unit allotted to a separate employee and used by him and his family as a residence. The mere fact that adjoining units shared common walls did not alter their character as separate houses. The assessment authority could not enlarge the meaning of "building" merely to increase revenue, and separate residential units could not be treated as one composite building for house-tax assessment.

Conclusion: Each residential quarter or bungalow was a separate building within the meaning of the Act. Clubbing the entire row of quarters or bungalows as one building for house-tax assessment was impermissible and the assessment made by the Committee was unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: A separate residential dwelling unit used for human habitation remains a distinct building for house-tax purposes, even if it shares common structural elements with adjoining units, and it cannot be clubbed with other units merely to enhance tax liability.

---