ORDER V.R. Newaskar, J. This is a reference made by the Civil Judge, Second Class, Bhanpura, under the following circumstances ;- Motor Vehicle M. B. L. 1529 was brought within the limits of Bhanpura Muncipality some time in October 1957. The Municipality thereupon recovered Rs. 900 on 13-10-1957 and Rs. 256.25 nP. on 16-10-1957 in all amounting to Rs. 1,156.25 nP. from the importer Lakhmichand Gulabchand. He, after making the deposit as per demand of the Municipality, filed the present suit challenging the legality of the levy and collection of the octroi duty from him after serving the Municipality with a statutory notice on 29-11-1957. The Municipality in answer to the plaintiff's challenge of the levy and collection contended that this was done lawfully in accordance with the provisions of the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act and the Bye-laws made thereunder. The learned Civil Judge, Bhanpura, before whom this question as regards the legality of levy and collection of the octroi duty in respect of the motor vehicle was raised felt that there was apparent conflict between the provisions of section 22 of the Madhya Bharat Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1949, and the rules including Octroi Schedule made by the Bhanpura Municipality under sections 69 (1) (iv), 45 (i) and 46 (1) of the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act, 1954. He, therefore, has referred the following questions for the opinion of the High Court:- Whether the provisions of sections 69 (1) (iv), 45 (1) and 46 (1) of the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act, 1954, which is a general Act and the rules made thereunder levying octroi duty on motor vehicles are inconsistent with the provisions of section 22 of the Madhya Bharat Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1949, which is a special Act. If the answer is in the affirmative, whether the provisions of section 6 (2) of the Madhya Pradesh Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, which came into force in the Madhya Bharat region on 1-11-1957, retrospectively validates the levy of octroi duty under the above provisions of the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act, 1954. If the answer is in the affirmative, whether the provisions of section 6 (2) of the Madhya Pradesh Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, which came into force in the Madhya Bharat region on 1-11-1957, retrospectively validates the levy of octroi duty under the above provisions of the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act, 1954. It is not disputed before me by the learned counsel for both the parties that while considering the question as regards the legality of the imposition and collection of the octroi duty in respect of a motor vehicle imported in the Bhanpura Municipality in October 1957 reference to section 6 of the Central Province and Berar Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1947, which is extended to the Madhya Bharat region on 1-11-1957, is out of place. The material provisions which deserve to be considered are section 22 of the Madhya Bharat Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1949 and the provisions of the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act, 1954, together with the Rules and Bye-laws made thereunder which authorise the levy and collection of such octroi duty. Section 22 of the former Act is as follows:- Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any other law for the time being in force in any part of the United State, it shall not be lawful for the municipalities or local bodies to levy any tax or toll in respect of any motor vehicle. It is clear from the terms of this section that it is the special provision relating to Motor Vehicles and it excludes the application of any other law which might be there contrary to it. But it may be contended that the provisions contained in the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act, 1954, being later in point of time should prevail. It is not disputed that there is no express repeal of the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1949, by the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act 1954, and the question to be considered is whether we can hold that by reason of the provisions contained in section 69 of the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act as also in other provisions in the Act and the Rules and Bye-laws made thereunder there is implied repeal. Now the provision regarding imposition of octroi duty on goods and animals in general imported within the Municipal limit is a general provisions whereas the provision contained in section 22 of the Madhya Bharat Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1949, excluding the power of the Municipalities and the local bodies to impose any tax or toll in respect of the motor vehicle is a special law. It is well settled that a general later law does not abrogate an earlier special one merely by implication (vide Maxell on the Interpretation of Statutes, Tenth Edition, page 176). The learned author quotes an observation of Lord Selborne in Seward v. The Nera Cruz (1884) 10 App. Cas. 59 (68). Where there are general words in a later Act which are capable of reasonable and sensible application without extending them to subjects Especially dealt with by earlier legislation, you are not to hold that earlier and special legislation indirectly repealed, altered or derogated from merely by force of such general words, without any indication of a particular intention to do so. Crawford on Statutory Construction observes:- It is not uncommon to find one statute treating a subject in general terms and another treating only a part of the same subject-matter in a more minute manner. Where this situation exists, the two statutes should be read together and harmonized. This is especially true where the two statutes are in pari materia. In the event of repugnancy, the special statute should prevail, in the absence of a contrary legislative intent, since the specific statute more clearly evidences the legislative intent than the general statute does. And this rule-that a statute relating to a specific subject controls a general statute which includes the specific subject-is not necessarily dependent on the time of the enactment of such statutes, although it may be a vital and important consideration. Similar view is expressed by Cries on Statute Law (Fifth Edition) at page 348 where the learned author quotes the observations of Lord Selborne referred to above. Having regard to these well settled principles as regards interpretation of statutes and in view of the very clear words in section 22 of the Madhya Bharat Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1949, it cannot be doubted that that provision will prevail over the provision contained in the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act, 1954. The reference is answered accordingly.