IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL No.27 OF 2002 Between: Purandas Ranchoddas ..... Appellant And The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyderabad Division …Respondent The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL No.27 OF 2002 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in M.A.No.107 of 2001, on the file of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, dated 26.09.2002. 2. The factual background for the appeal is that the appellant was aggrieved by the Assessment Letter No. 213/TC1/MCH/A9/2001, dated 29.05.2001, in respect of the premises bearing Municipal No.22-6-787/2, Mir Chowk, Hyderabad. He was issued a special notice on 05.02.2001 and after receiving his objections and hearing him, the respondent corporation confirmed the Annual Rental Value at Rs.1,20,000/- on which the yearly tax came to Rs.34,992/- with effect from 01.04.2000. The appellant filed M.A.No.107 of 2001 challenging the said assessment and in the impugned judgment, the learned Chief Judge has noted that the premises in question was leased out to M/s. Heera Traders on a monthly rent of Rs.12,000/- including fixtures and fittings and the total plinth area of the non- residential premises is 5000 square feet. The learned Chief Judge also took into account the fact that the owner provided a lift, electrical fittings, tube lights and fans, etc., to the tenant and from the facts seen from the records, the learned Chief Judge felt that it will be reasonable to reduce the Monthly Rental Value by 30% taken towards amenities. Consequently, the Monthly Rental Value worked out at Rs.8,400/- and the Annual Rental Value came to Rs.1,00,800/-. The learned Chief Judge directed the respondent corporation to collect the tax from the appellant on such Annual Rental Value with effect from 01.04.2001 only as the final order was passed only on 29.05.2001. 3. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant preferred the present appeal contending that the rent was only Rs.1,500/- per month and the assessment could not have been within three years from the earlier assessment in 1997. The relevant factors like the location, utility and age of the property were not taken into account and the tax could not have been retrospectively imposed and that too without following any procedure. Hence, the appellant contended that substantial questions of law arise about ignoring the relevant factors and the assessment being within three years from the last revision. 4. Heard Sri K.K. Waghray, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri R. Radha Krishna Reddy, learned standing counsel for the respondent corporation. 5. The point for consideration is whether any substantial questions of law arise in the Second Appeal warranting interference with the impugned judgment and decree? 6. While admitting the Second Appeal, no substantial questions of law were formulated by this Court and hence, the Second Appeal is being considered with reference to the substantial questions of law indicated in the grounds of appeal and covered by the above point. 7. The appellant, in his objections to the special notice, claimed that M.A.No.1 of 2001 was pending against an earlier assessment in respect of the property but it is not shown as to under what provision or principle of law, the corporation is disabled from making any assessment for a subsequent period in exercise of its statutory power. The appellant also contended that the premises was let out only for Rs.1,500/- per month including Rs.600/- towards the value of amenities and facilities and the area of the premises also is disputed. The appellant, however, did not produce any material to substantiate the rate of rent or extent claimed by him. He also did not place before the Court any material to show the prevailing rates of rent in the locality at the relevant time for similar properties though he claimed such rental values to be much less. He also did not place any material to probablise that the assessment did not give credit for the value of the amenities and facilities provided to the tenant from out of the total rent payable. The objections of the appellant to the special notice were clearly considered by the corporation which reiterated the reasonableness of the assessment with reference to the rental values in the area, in the assessment order passed on 29.05.2001. Even the special notice was based on the self- assessment returns of certain property owners of that area and also the rental value data gathered from various sources. While there is, thus, no factual basis for sustaining the claims of the appellant, the learned Chief Judge had clearly found from the records that the monthly rent was Rs.12,000/- including for fixtures and fittings for the non-residential premises of a plinth area of 5000 square feet. This finding of fact cannot be disturbed in the Second Appeal without any material and the learned Chief Judge had given a reasonable reduction of 30% towards the amenities provided by the landlord to the tenant and worked out the actual Monthly Rental Value. While assessing the tax payable, the learned Chief Judge also gave further relief to the appellant directing the respondent corporation to collect the tax from 01.04.2001 only but not from 01.04.2000. The reasoning in the impugned judgment, thus, does not appear to be fallacious for any reason and consequently, no questions of law either about the manner of assessment or the period of assessment can be considered to have been probablised to be involved and the Second Appeal cannot sustain itself in the absence of any such substantial questions of law and more so, in the absence of any reasonable basis for deviating from the conclusions of fact arrived at by the learned Chief Judge. The Second Appeal has to consequently fail. 8. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is dismissed without costs. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 10th November, 2010 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL No.27 OF 2002 November 10, 2010. KL