Skip to content


Municipal Council of Chidambaram Vs. Venkatanarayana Pillai - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1901)ILR24Mad644
AppellantMunicipal Council of Chidambaram
RespondentVenkatanarayana Pillai
Excerpt:
district municipalities act (madras) act iv of 1854, section 53, schedule v, proviso 4 - person carrying on business as a moneylender--liability to pay profession tax. - .....is said that the proviso has the effect of bringing such persons within the schedule, because, as it is argued, every money-lender shall be placed at least in class vii irrespectively of his income.2. if the income was not under rs. 30 no doubt that would be the effect of the proviso, and that is all we think that the legislature intended, but not to bring within one of the classes persons who, apart from the proviso, would be in no class at all. this is indicated by the words immediately preceding the proviso, viz., every person described in class i whose pay, salary or pension amounts, or whose income is estimated to amount to rs. 30 a month or upwards--re. 1.3. the result would probably have been otherwise if those words had been omitted, and the phrase 'provided that' substituted.4......
Judgment:

1. The question is whether a money-lender whose income is below Rs. 30 a month is chargeable with any tax under Section 53 of the District Municipalities Act. There is no doubt that be exercises one of the trades specified in schedule A. Apart from the proviso, that schedule does not include persons whose income is under Rs. 30 It is said that the proviso has the effect of bringing such persons within the schedule, because, as it is argued, every money-lender shall be placed at least in Class VII irrespectively of his income.

2. If the income was not under Rs. 30 no doubt that would be the effect of the proviso, and that is all we think that the Legislature intended, but not to bring within one of the classes persons who, apart from the proviso, would be in no class at all. This is indicated by the words immediately preceding the proviso, viz., every person described in Class I whose pay, salary or pension amounts, or whose income is estimated to amount to Rs. 30 a month or upwards--Re. 1.

3. The result would probably have been otherwise if those words had been omitted, and the phrase 'Provided that' substituted.

4. The petition is dismissed with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //