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

1948 Supreme(Mad) 79

HAPPELL
Commissioner, Municipal Council, Vizagapatam – Appellant
Versus
Srimathi Siddeswara Devi and others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K. Kuttikrishna Menon for Appellant.
H. Prabhakara Rao for Respondents.

Judgment.-

This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by the Commissioner of the Municipal Council, Vizagapatam, for the recovery of the land tax alleged to be due for a certain site for the years 1940-41, 1941-42 and 1942-43 and for the first half-year of 1943-44 at Rs. 76-4-0 a year. It appears that up to 1940 a house and site of about 4 acres had been assessed as if the whole of the 4 acres was adjacent and appurtenant to the house. In 1940, however, on the report of a Special Officer some 3 acres out of the 4 were excluded from the site held to be appurtenant to the house and were separately taxed. It was in respect of the tax due on the land held not to be appurtenant to the house that the suit was brought, and the defendants maintained that they were not liable to pay the tax, because this part of the site was appurtenant to the house. On the question of fact both the lower Courts have held that the land in question was appurtenant to the house so that a separate tax should not have been levied and the suit has been dismissed. In the lower appellate Court it was argued for the Municipality that by reason of the provisions of section 354 of the Madras District Municipalit









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