IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL No.16 of 2002 DATE:06.12.2010 Between: R.Venkateswara Rao …… Appellant And: Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. By its Commissioner …..Respondent HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL No.16 of 2002 JUDGMENT: This miscellaneous second appeal is directed against appellate order dated 12.07.2002 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam in T.A. No.36 of 2001 confirming order passed by the Commissioner of Visakhapatnam Municipality. 2) It is contended by the appellant’s counsel that the premisis in question is not madras terraced, but is A.C sheet roof one and that it was not being used for industrial purpose. Inspection report of the Municipal Corporation revealed that the premisis was being used for storing certain material and that it is used as a godown. When the premisis is being used as godown, it is certainly not used for domestic purpose. It is being used for non-domestic purposes. Whether the godown is a commercial godown or industrial godown, it is for the appellant to prove the same before the authorities concerned as well as before the appellate authority. Similarly it is for the appellant to place material before the authorities including the appellate Judge to show that the premisis is not a madras terraced one but is A.C. sheet roofed one. The appellant did not produce any material before the lower appellate Court in support of his contention. Therefore, the lower appellate Court is justified in confirming the order passed by the Commissioner. I further find that no question of law arises for consideration in this second appeal. 3) In the result, the miscellaneous second appeal is dismissed. No costs. _______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J December 06, 2010 ksh