IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH (7TH) DAY OF OCTOBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SRI G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.1129 of 1994 Between: APSRTC, rep. by its Depot Manager, Nellore … Appellant And: The Commissioner, Nellore Municipality, Nellore … Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SRI G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.1129 of 1994 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 29.04.1994 in OS No.10 of 1989 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Nellore, wherein, the suit filed by the appellant herein for declaration that the order dated 17.12.1988 passed by the respondent-corporation as invalid and not enforceable, was dismissed. 2. Heard the learned standing counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondent-corporation. Perused the record. 3. The appellant-APSRTC was previously assessed to tax at Rs.21,942.75 for the bus station complex. Subsequently, the tax was enhanced in the year 1988 to Rs.53,894.45. The appellant-APSRTC disputed the said enhancement of tax. According to the respondent- Municipality, the enhancement was made after gap of three years in the year 1988 and in view of construction of additional accommodation in the bus station complex for locating the Regional Office and II Depot etc., the tax was assessed on the basis of the rental value. 4. It is not disputed and is also admitted by PW.1 that additional constructions were made and the Regional Office was opened in August 1985 and II Depot was opened in May 1987 in the same complex. He also admitted that the APSRTC was realizing rents of Rs.20,314/- in the year 1987. The rental value of the entire complex was fixed at Rs.30,000/-. It is also not disputed the first floor was constructed in the year 1985 and improvements were effected to the existing building till 1987 for providing accommodation to locate II Depot and the Regional Office. Since there are improvements to the existing structures and additional constructions were made for locating other offices and since the rental value also got enhanced, the respondent-Municipality has assessed the tax by enhancing the same to Rs.53,894.45 based on the rental value. Admittedly, the machinery and plant were not assessed and only the structures and the improvements made by the appellant were assessed to tax. The learned Subordinate Judge on proper appreciation of the evidence available on record rightly held that the appellant-plaintiff is not entitled for declaration or injunction. 5. In the circumstances, the impugned judgment and decree of the trial Court, dismissing the suit filed by the appellant-APSRTC, is therefore not liable to be interfered with. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 07.10.2010 bss