https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187817 A Government-owned drain did not vest in the municipal corporation merely because the statute imposed a general duty to maintain drains; vesting of Government property required compliance with the specific statutory procedure, so sewerage charges could not be levied on that basis. A separate demand under the alternative charging provision also failed because the required statutory notice had not been served, and correspondence could not replace that precondition. The Court therefore held that recovery of sewerage charges was not maintainable on either basis, while leaving open the possibility of proceeding in accordance with law after fulfilling the statutory requirements. en-us Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Nov 2016 11:38:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187817 A Government-owned drain did not vest in the municipal corporation merely because the statute imposed a general duty to maintain drains; vesting of Government property required compliance with the specific statutory procedure, so sewerage charges could not be levied on that basis. A separate demand under the alternative charging provision also failed because the required statutory notice had not been served, and correspondence could not replace that precondition. The Court therefore held that recovery of sewerage charges was not maintainable on either basis, while leaving open the possibility of proceeding in accordance with law after fulfilling the statutory requirements. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187817