SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(AP) 854

T. Umrao Devi Bantia – Appellant
Versus
Appellate Authority-cum-I Additional Chief Judge, city Civil Court – Respondent


B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, J, J.

( 1 ) :-THE petitioner is the owner and claims to be in possession of the premises bearing No. 207, sikh Road, Secunderabad, which is a residential house. The 2nd respondent - secunderabad Cantonment Board vide its tax bill, dated 17-1-2002, raised a supplementary bill for the period from 1-4-2000 to 31-3-2002 proposing to realize the tax from the petitioner such as house tax, conservancy tax, water tax, lighting tax and library cess and called upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 7,41,578/- enhancing the annual rental value of the house to rs. 7,00,000/- from that of Rs. 6,00,000/ -. However, there appears to be some dispute as to the nature of the premises with which we are not concerned for the present in this writ petition.

( 2 ) AGGRIEVED by the action of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner herein preferred appeal under Section 84 of the Cantonments act, 1924 (for short the Act ) before the 1st respondent on several grounds, which is numbered as C. M. A. No. 38 of 2002. The 2nd respondent filed LA. No. 3056 of 2003 in the appellate Court with a prayer to reject the appeal preferred by the petitioner herein on the ground that the petitioner failed to









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top