- (1.)These two appeals raise common questions which could be disposed of by a common judgment. The appellants are the plaintiffs. The defendant in the two suits brought by them is the Municipal Committee of the City Municipality, Gulbarga, established under the provisions of the Hyderabad District Municipalities Act of 1956.
(2.)The plaintiffs are merchants in Gulbarga who bring into the municipal limits various articles. Their prayer in the two suits was for a declaration that the levy of octroi by the Municipal Committee, which it imposed under the provisions of the Hyderabad District Municipalities Act, which will be referred to as the 'Act', was an illegal levy and for the refund of octroi collected from them. In the suit out of which RSA.No.677 of 1965 arises, the plaintiff claimed a refund of Rs.1,514-79 P. and in the other suit (RSA.No.677/1965) the plaintiff claimed a refund of Rs.730. The Munsiff gave the plaintiffs the decrees they sought, which, however, were reversed by the Civil Judge in the appeals preferred by the Municipal Committee. So, the plaintiffs appeal.
(3.)The first impeachment of the imposed levy was that it was made in disobedience to statutory provisions. But, Mr. Appa Rao made a statement that the pronouncement of this Court in Veerappa Gundappa Kandur v. The Municipal Committee, Gulbarga, (1965) 2 Mys.L.J. 551 makes unavailable to the plaintiffs that contention. So, Mr. Appa Rao did not ask me to say that the impost made by the City Municipal Committee invites the criticism that it was not made in conformity with statutory provisions. Mr. Appa Rao, therefore, made before me a very restricted submission that the octroi had been collected from the plaintiffs on articles not falling within Schedule 'D' to the Act. It is indisputable that S.109 of the Act bestowed competence on the Municipal Committee to levy octroi only on those goods of which there is an enumeration in Schedule 'D' to the Act and Mr. Appa Rao's contention was that the Committee had recovered from the plaintiffs, octroi on goods other than those catalogued in that Schedule. Mv attention was asked to paragraphs 6 and 7 of the plaint, out of which RSA.No.677/1965 arises, in which the plaintiff stated that although seven items such as copra, sago, poppy seeds, kismis, kaju, betel nuts and newspapers, a number of other items are not found in Sch.'D'. The Municipal Committee was unauthorisedly collecting octroi on all those articles.
;