HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO C.M.S.A.NO.34 of 1998 DATED: 19.01.2010 BETWEEN: Dharmavanth Hindi High School Trust,Yakutpura,Hyderabad and another …Appellants And Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad,Hyderabad …Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO C.M.S.A.NO.34 of 1998 JUDGMENT:- This C.M.S.A. is filed against the Judgment and decree dated 12.12.1995 passed by the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad in M.A.No.344 of 1993. 2. The said M.A.No. 344 of 1993 before the first appellate Court was filed against the order dated 06.03.1993 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Circle I, Hyderabad in reference No.1038/B-12/TCI/93 received on 03.07.1993 levying property tax under Section 202 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act. The property tax was levied against the premises in which a High School run by the appellant and it is old one. The lower appellate Court rejected the contention urged by the appellant that the premises is exempt from tax according to Section 202(1) (bb) of the H.M.C.Act. Against the said judgment, the appellant preferred the present C.M.S.A. 3. The following substantial question of law involved in the present second appeal is: Whether the learned Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad affirmed the order of the Deputy Commissioner on erroneous interpretation of Section 202(1)(bb) of the H.M.C.Act. 4. I have heard both the learned counsel on record. 5. Section 202(1)(bb) of G.H.M.C.Act 1955 reads as follows: Educational institutions up to 10th class, the buildings, of which are donated by charitable institutions or philanthropists, or which are depending on the grant-in-aid by the Government for the maintenance and such other educational institutions which are not running purely on commercial lines, but serving the cause of primary education which the Government may consider from time to time; are exempt from levy of property tax. 6. The contention urged on behalf of the appellant is that the premises was donated by a philanthropist and the high school is being run in the said premises by the appellant which is a trust entirely on the grant-in-aid received from the Government and the educational institution being not a profit working organization, it is exempt from levy of property tax. 7. Indisputably the respondent reduced the ratable value by 30% with effect from 1.4.1992 i.e. from the original ratable value of Rs.1,08,000/-to Rs.75,600/- and levied Rs.11,838.95 ps. as service charges. There is also no dispute about the fact that the appellant is also running a junior college apart from the High School, it also constructed seven shop rooms and let them out to the tenants on a monthly rent of Rs.400/-. The learned first appellate Court considering the said facts affirmed the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner. 8. The above mentioned aspects are pure questions of fact and further they are admitted and also became final in the first appeal before the learned Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad. Therefore, such questions cannot be permitted to be raised in the present second appeal and this Court is not supposed to examine these questions. 9. Running a junior college besides the high school and constructing shop rooms and letting them on monthly rent of Rs.400/- would keep the case of the appellant out of the purview of Sub Section 1(bb) of Section 202 of the G.H.M.C. Act. I do not agree with the contention that the learned first appellate Court mis-interpreted the above mentioned legal provision in confirming the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner levying tax against the high school run by the appellant. 10. For the foregoing reasons the appeal fails and the same is dismissed without any order as to costs. __________________ R. KANTHA RAO,J Date: 19.01.2010 kvrm HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO C.M.S.A.NO.34 of 1998 19th JANUARY, 2010