P. S. NARAYANA, J. ( 1 ) HEARD Sri Rama Rao Ghanta, learned standing Counsel representing the municipal Corporation of Hyderabad and sri Jayasurya, counsel representing the respondents. ( 2 ) THE matter came up for admission and at the stage of admission with the consent of both the counsel the main appeal itself is taken up for hearing for final disposal. ( 3 ) THE present civil miscellaneous second appeal is filed under Section 287 of hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 (hereinafter in short referred to as the act for the purpose of convenience) against an order passed in M. A. No. 89 of 1997 on the file of Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, city Civil Court, Hyderabad. The impugned judgment, as against which the present civil miscellaneous second appeal is filed, reads as hereunder:"heard the Counsel. Perused the records. In the circumstances as it is first assessment, the MRV @ Rs. 3. 00 per sft. , is justified and reasonable. It is new construction in Himayath Nagar area. The MCH has fixed @ Rs. 6. 00 per sft. , which is abnormal. No rental declarations filed. There is no document filed and no proof of prevailing rental values. Therefore, it is directed to collect the property Taxes @ Rs. 3. 00 per sft. , on correct measurements of carpet area w. e. f. 1-4-96. Ordered accordingly. " ( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant- municipal Corporation of Hyderabad had submitted that the Corporation had valued the tax assessment of the premises no. 3-6-365/102 at Rs. 6,004. 00 per annum and this was fixed on the annual rental value of the said premises i. e. , Rs. 18,720. 00. The learned counsel also had drawn my attention to the different provisions of the act and had contended that though the tax was fixed in accordance with law, the appellate Court without making a speaking order and without recording proper reasons had disposed of the appeal, and hence, the said order cannot be sustained. The learned counsel had drawn my attention to sections 282 and 287 of the Act. The learned counsel had drawn my attention to sections 282 and 287 of the Act. ( 5 ) PER contra, Sri Jayasurya, learned counsel for the respondents had submitted that though reasons in detail had not been recorded, certain reasons had been given while arriving at a conclusion and in view of the limitations imposed by Section 287 of the act, there is no question of law or usage having the force of law or construction of a document, and hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. The learned counsel also submitted that in the event of this Court remanding the matter for want of reasons, the respondents in this appeal may be permitted to produce the additional material available for the purpose of substantiating their contentions. ( 6 ) AS can be seen from the impugned judgment as against which the present civil miscellaneous second appeal is filed under section 287 of the Act, the reasons recorded are not satisfactory. The non-recording of valid reasons while disposing of an appeal by itself is a question of law. Section 287 of the Act deals with the appeals. Section 287 (b) of the Act, no doubt specifies that an appeal shall lie to the High Court for any decision of the Judge, or a question of law under Section 282, or usage having the force of law, or the construction of a document. ( 7 ) IN view of the fact that valid reasons had not been recorded by the appellate court in accordance with law, this being a question of law, the appeal can be disposed of while deciding such a question of law. ( 8 ) IN view of the same, the judgment made in M. A. No. 89 of 1997 dated 17-7-1988 by the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, city Civil Courts, Hyderabad, is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded for the purpose of affording an opportunity to both the parties to advance their respective contentions and dispose of the same in accordance with law. ( 9 ) ACCORDINGLY, the appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs.