The Division Bench later on being approached under Art.
The Municipal Corporation of the City of Bangalore being of the opinion that the hoardings companytaining advertisements put up by the appellant were exigible to tax issued a demand numberice dated March 7, 1973 calling upon the.
5871 83 as the advertisement tax including arrears.
appellant to pay a sum o.f Rs.
The Municipal Corporation did number accept the companytention of the appellants and pressed for paying up the tax.
From the Judgment and Order dated the 3.12.1975 of the Karnataka High Court in Writ Appeal No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The appellant is a firm of advertising companymer cial goods and other items by putting up hoardings companytain ing advertisements on properties taken on lease licence from various owners.
133 of the Constitution granted a certificate of fitness and hence this appeal before us.
Thereupon the appellant filed an appeal under the Letters Patent before a Division Bench which also affirmed the order of the single Judge, though on different grounds.
The appellant has produced photographs of some of the hoardings which demonstrate these facts.
The appellant then filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka praying that the order of the Corporation demanding payment of tax be quashed, because the advertise ments were clearly exempt from tax by virtue of the aforesaid proviso The writ petition was in the first instance heard by a single Judge who by his order dated April 4, 19.74 overruled the companytention of the appellant and dismissed the petition.
The appellant represented to the Municipal authorities that as the hoardings companytaining advertisements were situate within the railway premises they squarely fell within clause e of the third proviso to s. 136 of the Act.
325/1976.
S. Javali, Jagannath Shetty and B.P. Singh for resp.
The appellant also has been putting up hoardings on railway lands in the companypound of the Bangalore Railway Station.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by FAZAL ALI, J. Whether hoardings companytaining adver tisements fixed in the premises of a railway station front ing a ,public street are exigible to tax under the provi sions of s. 136 of the City of Bangalore Municipal Corpora tion Act, 1949 Act No.
S. Desai, Sanjev Aggarwal and R.B. Datar, for the appellant.
Nemo for respondent No.
284/74 .
The facts of the case lie within a narrow companypass and the point raised by companynsel for the appellant is one of first impression and undoubtedly requires serious companysid eration.
LXIX of 1949 hereinafter referred to as the Act is the substantial question of law involved in this appeal by certificate.
N. Prasad and Girish Chandra, for the Intervener Union of India.
