Malalasekere V. Municipal Council

1934 Present: Macdonell C.J.

MALALASEKERE v. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, COLOMBO.

 24 C. R. Colombo, 90,688

    Municipal rates-Premises of art society-Art gallery not a school building- Annual value-Method of ascertaining-Value of building-Criterion of rent-Municipal Councils Ordinance, So. 6 of 1910, 115 (I).

Where premises occupied by the Ceylon Society of Arts, a voluntary association formed for the purpose of exhibiting pictures and promoting art, were housed in a building erected out of public subscriptions collected from the members of the society, and the building was assessed by the Colombo Municipal Council for rates,-

Held, that the annual value of the building should be determined by ascertaining what is a reasonable rent which the society would have to pay for the building if the society had to obtain it for displaying its pictures.

The capital sum spent on the building would be a criterion by which the rent may be estimated.

The art gallery of the society is not a school building within the meaning of the proviso to section 115 (1) of the Ordinance.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Commissioner of Requests, Colombo.

A. E. Keuneman (with him E. F. N. Gratiaen), for defendant, appellant. H. V. Perera (with him F. C. W. van Geyzel)., for plaintiff, respondent.

October 30, 1934. MACDONELL C.J.-

In this case the plaintiff is the Secretary of the Ceylon Society of Arts and the defendant is the Municipal Council of Colombo. The defendant, in accordance with the powers conferred upon it by the Municipal Councils Ordinance, 1910, assessed the annual value of the premises of the plaintiff society at Rs. 1,500 for the year 1933. The plaintiff society contended that this assessment was excessive and took action in the Court of Requests as provided by section 124 (1) of the Ordinance. The amount claimed as rates, Rs. 300, is within the jurisdiction of such a Court. In its action the plaintiff society asked for a declaration that its property was a "school building" within section 115 (1) of the Ordinance and should therefore be exempted from being rated. In the alternative it asked for a declaration that the true annual value of the building it occupies is Rs. 500 and not Rs. 1,500. Judgment passed for the plaintiff society on both these contentions, and from that judgment the Municipal Council, defendant, brings this appeal.

The facts seem to be that the plaintiff society is a voluntary association for the exhibiting of pictures and the promotion of art generally, in Colombo. It collected subscriptions from its members and erected a building about midway between the Municipal Council buildings and the Museum at a total cost of Rs. 58,273. It charges an entrance fee of 25 cents for each person, but this source of revenue is probably very small. It has a collection of pictures, including a number of copies of Old Masters, and the artificial lighting in the building is so arranged

that it would fall on the pictures so exhibited but would not light up the main body of the building. It is not connected with the electric main, so it can only be opened during daylight. We are specially told in evidence that it has no drainage. There is evidence that students study the pictures exhibited and copy them, and that, under the auspices of the society, lectures are given by people of authority on art but that they are not given in the art gallery building, but elsewhere. There is also evidence that professional artists and Technical College teachers take their pupils from time to time to study the pictures there.

I will deal first with the claim of the plaintiff society that its art gallery is a "school building" within section 115 (1) of the Ordinance. On the evidence given in this case it clearly has no claim to that title. The case of Dr. Coudert v. Municipal Council of Colombo1[1 6 N. L. R. 338.] decided that only those buildings of a school are

Click Here to Read the rest of this document