Appellant challenged the maintainability of a suit for refund of double duty paid under Section 133 of the MP Municipalities Act, 1957, arguing the court had a right to examine regularity of assessment. The court held that no statutory right to raise such objections existed in civil suits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN TH E HHIG COURT GE MADHYA PRADES‘H : JABALPUR / 199g % /§ A PELLANT . ragarPallca—Pis‘wa ard Kota, T£)D'“’“@EE""Dt wstrwalau lspr. —rV$st1 $- " & QMLNTb.U‘“’E l) The veganl Pap tar r l l Co Ltd.,havmg TFI‘“ §")¥ Fa ad Ofrwcn 1n Neyta Suohasn Chant} Road, Calcut ta. AJPbgL UNhRD SECTIOh 100 C. . C. "Ialm 1n Eb’p a1 for mvgrsal T dh ree vuluad at Rs. 5000/on wlchh court fee of ds.500/-1s ‘V' n aledffx as :m me Lower uauhr‘
‘ WGH {EQURE QF £EHATTEGARH AT BILASPUR $ingie $ench: Harabla’ shri Ju5tica Fmaham Kama! Mighr§a Second Apaeal Nthm;‘ ww
Appénam Nagar PaEEka Pa§%$hac%, Kata DefeMani Versas; ‘x ‘ %esp7andant The Eenga! Papa Mm {ta Léd‘ Sm i'k K. Randay, wunéae f0: the appani.ka AapeaE uniiar $ectiml’ 1M) m $ha Qade aaf aévii Wamdum . 9%L JUEGMENY (Q4£3M9§ £
" J
Wis judgmem wall gnvem the dispgmal a‘f; Samcc Apga§ Nagwgta Swami Appwi NOXEHAQM and $acam Apea§§ Moijw $9? m ali me appeal$ the maitiff/iewanéemn gas filed a 39$ 'me €53: iefumi a? amaum af Oatmé duty mueci’ed by #13 appéantiMmicipaitl (umiih fm the {eievant piG/.¢y-erd Thg seam wag '{he ‘appea desreed by the triai gourt. fimt E preferred, by ”L’w agpeanwv‘lumuépa%ks cauncil wage di$p9sad ef by mmmzm jwgww% a m} {m’eeie whhig are impugnec£ $3 mew meim amwais. {2} in the witten $¥ai:emmt med by the appeaanefemit,t’dam amcmgat stha gmunds, E: was statmé that in v§ew {:f ihe gmvisssmsa aantainad in Sestéon 13 % m 135 9f Muniaipaiitiw Ad, 19E? ma $u§t 3 mi mamtamabla 39m ma $m2f§s heiaw kave immeed thg aug‘i. {3} The gmsemsmandappealhaSbean admitted 43E: me fezfngmw wbsatantiai qu&$tim§ m imm-
‘/\
“Whather ‘m in View a? ma prayismm aanmimd $e¢tian 133 a? the MP. Municipaiity Aci §§E§$ whem x campkata gzmceumre i6: mfund m5 me iktmi Mam imaa <sup>pre$criim€£ the aka?! smi is banézi?”
m L,
éeamed cwrwet m mg appagam submitsra that by igime “Q {4} gravitzEétzamtainedin$egtian$33 a}? khe Amt, wm thea mgwm wit ' prafeared by §h€ §3¥amfiffwa$bawdam $h$framr$ the %mwgnad iiidgmajntamt£ec¥ee passszed{anmeQawSbamwtie3ewamha$a$ l 33km. i \ \
‘sA5} $ee3titm 133 at the Munieipalitie$Aai,wm §$ adrmmd harem ‘geicaw hr {eady mfereiwee :—
“£33. Remm? m‘ imw {é} ?%réa SW5 §Wemmem may mam Mei; andEE!$55A3?@gaigfmgifmswamsf taxes aw sigma Mes may impam iimiméiim m? 5w}: refamdg. {2}Narefmdm‘anyfax$haé’ wacéaim3bié£3ymy gtfyerwisg was that if; aawmanae wifh we getscm wmrf‘sfms0f€m’3Am,gndmemmSaw?$3ya~§aw3mwg ihereandei” ,(:V‘
{6} m the mat€er a? 3am 5mm wmgaw Vs. Jaba§pm Munitimaiity mpm'ted in NR $9??? $6: §§5 ihe §§ue$stic3n {warding £ maimainabmty $3? a suit queskmmng §e€§ £31? €z‘cimi imaer me2g arid $arar Mwiaipaktiyji‘xstgamesup§0rgammmaticmbgfareiha %éan’%3?.€a 'rse%::§ Th“ Suweme Cam and m ma said saatwd @i ms been by Sauprame$au¥t m 9am2a,2%,22and2‘3. “2a T§¥a5e iamvisims wavy m aw ffm? gaiaca ghat' éfEe dgfendgnts fwdutg£fe$é1sly §a5$gss3%:I’ghtaim!${2e mwef3a &sses$ and magma! {heaci'miIrmtyanddwbla duff; {m §a0d$whichareWaugh!wiffrmthemmicipa¥Writsfar 3mg mnswmpfiax:a!“ mmmegam. ?.%w sircgimmame mm fhe i§efemdam$ mighf have am‘w in wwéss 9f {if irregumffy in gm axwz’iseafmat gmwgrframatSwmrf #:a wncitmigm that me a3sw$memw:acavgty9f #mfax i$ wiffmxt jwiwicfimk. Agpiyim we wst5nKarmaM§!i5, if
_3/
'fi g
x
{he appmprgmeaumartywhtleexemsmg#5gariscimfior: {:f me Asa imde‘g' the fe3evant gargm$n$ zmd gawets frmdsermneausiymatawassewmentakraadywaée{gm haa f améctesd w thaiar;aweswer:mixie£0paydwbia a? (jaw whenRufa wfiz} if? faat {iaes ratJuSt®mm? mpaSIaw :t cammgm? saint ma? {fag aecssms? a? five “f “w ahan‘?af ;s wxfmut §§§sdumn¢ Queaswrs awcéewsam9memarmeas t‘m in“ mg.-aswssmg r‘f apart I ‘fram {f3 consmuaidftmy aye, ashe m tr; Dhmwm g fAiFE 1969 SC 7’8} fa 4m? de aisiara?ihéaumafé$ ifisef w: by {ha Arf am? ae mf smf Eatmat #e if {he ardem0f Maw ammm‘res am gwan imakty. Wree :s n8 wnsumtiwa? m 3's imwawaag'F : $6; grahibfaitn m :heassessmentwhi instamsass a5 a‘herewasin5hafafyaw ghawg‘a {MR 1Q66 SC 2493 R M L8M18‘w 3A5}?‘3§?G C 10G2§ anx g “ DnLafabm {NR ‘i9g5 SC I 3% gay: {mpgsgdix?maiszé sa,ws éirg‘m wcgmiiwtigma é é€3 $9}:72! a3 wig}? £3; Mwhsika? J Wm smkg {:31 We ma;ar1£y i Ewm;rank? ‘hmf E a miar y’RAI 1966 SC 24g) wag Wit a yemg Seamhiarméa? amhajx nia? aver? a maabw ef r§fm 2?. ?“hat i3: m wga§mt5mg ‘amver m” we autmyity‘ wa w izfg m ra5e— s gst ané fa levy dsufaié dufy. ‘ Stmdiy,ebaththeAcéamim3Rafa?waiair;§r€3vi3i6§35 whiw vw hwa wa’ced avime, embimgz thé aggfiévaig ar effesavefy ta Waiiwge ai? fileya§assessmegfm’ pty" 1W);e f dwbie duty. By regsar; cef {he éxigteme am! avbtvaiiaiié {if thaw spde?a wsmedie fhé aféingrjv’ remedy by way m“3 wrf www £29 exmtiwgw ime K» mferpreiatmnafSecfxzm54‘3;3f Me£c€ 22. ’Me wwmenf éha? a‘wbks :fwy 1M3; ¥we¢ m hé am $3””we We p§amfrff5 thaagf} mt gusafiwby Mw gGeS €63 €h$ mgregmesss m‘ me ,‘évy, m}: {a fha m‘ the assesm‘g ammwiw }'ha€ yaw gimmicky? authm‘zes the impesiébn 5f dwble {My .if dmg’abie \V arfia£es are impm‘ed {a} wi£haut paymgthedufy9r{$2 \ !t may x wétwut givmgdedaratim{athe09m}:Mahamr.
vL{’-
, 5 J f
1”.”.A~v
éw ghat geithar 9fthesetumemamuamiesascurredand ifhemfare fheréwa$ mjwWkatiwfa?hwpwmgdsaébia $u$ the afmr46mm wmrwsterimi);a“fhe:ma‘méf ia‘aiy. \ ‘gimva'eci m #7? Aaf aw? by fhe aafé’mi'é?tx pyesmmaf lée.r%her The raamave’ by way :Jf swé £§ as: rW‘ 1§ 2" Nat gag; maf§m A“? {3f €922 ,grgvi'déag w g affestiw ramedymamaggrigveij ga g}? k; sha~1§eag$gm; javw : ssmerat‘ sf iam‘mi daiy arm t1} aia im mfamd as cfmv ‘ ii§he§af ta;s a: reevwecd buétmé a i nfifaf$ m fa cu awdw fhemseiwss af éheSe remes.dne m $46 4 ? whiz: a“? $§i§n§cipaé c§mm§wtt feapened arm {awme ifw yaw aasys mams by “igmwarg asstm: dmy :m an 3maw€ “$7 r: i was {my § / A2355 #i af? ih a fem! g; we '3’‘f w ga mss a rk”? wfmn gt ie‘fwm {imilw {gdfyéw way Gf @enaify éma gwmsffd pz&f&rrad3Happegfagamsf#29iiecisfw g. m e: Mtmgaiw Cammifiee m we suh‘mwSiamfQffise‘ f, Jaws’gm; whey in; aa arder riatgii Jaw, i 4 1948 modicifée f§édeCim; ISéf ‘ the Cammiitéae £2}? &S3gm: themt9char wwre; i C}?M am em ameurit whhw wsa iess by 12 / m styad af $ g m ar #25? retaié prim a?” gouds. Piaf5mfif saccgawéd it; zgr exfem thaagh {ha 3gb Diyisésaa! Of§cer {swam #219 gsssewestm m‘ daabfa? dufy. Hamg 9Xbausfed mall“ #“Em9aig'ée3 ander meAc tandhav mg bew wnsfiigd£23! “re ‘ appeiiate afecisia ri. thmzgi? pam‘y, piamfiffgfumerifa ffae $iw'i Ccwf f0 ciaim Wea’efami “ma? is mgem£§3ib£€e m Wew of éhé pmviE‘ioncwiame m aemxcm $13} W“ tr»: 14%” 5xx» Th? scheme 9f the QPandBararMummpahtyActwgthmy6ta {7} 'm lew a? Oci‘m'i is 5imiaatEathg wwisienscania'med tha athhamwam Muaitsigaaiiiy Actre‘at'mgt0levy9f Qctroiandét$mfunci. $sct¥an 13312‘, G? ihe Am, mm prmédes ’éhgt n0 refund a? any tax $ha11 §e n§3§mab§% by any mrsmn wherwiwthanthatinacsuaiancewiihthe wavigim 5? this Am and the mlesaridbyelammadethew Smi‘e a haf her; 3M“
-6,
meatea gwer mus mavisim f9: aaimmg refuw Era any aéhE? mans-Eek, the samg isshaik apemte a5 a bar Ear §i£ing iha préxwm 3w alga 3W éherefara me‘ sui? med ixy éha msmnden? is mi; maintamabf'a, m mew GE \ me 33w iéi€3 iiiwm by ma Hea'b¥i& saprema {team m $am $.%;m:a i $mmpan¥§v§n Jahaiwv Mumtimmy {mpm}. \
{3) “ma aamxzar £9 ihe que3tim§ af iaw mama} hy ihh‘: £mr§ $s Wm; P €avwr m‘ &l‘1& appe!¥ant. The aawnd :aiapaaé é$ kmmfm'e aHGwad‘ Vri émpugrsed i0a¥gmea¥ anti:desrae §$ $Et-askia 'ma {ewameni zahaR béar tiw 3%? 3f me appeilaat m khia {twauw
Sd/Prashant KumarMishra Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 133 of the MP Municipalities Act bars filing a suit for refund of tax paid at twice the rate when no objection was raised in the suit.
Whether the automatic refund remedy under Section 135 deprives the petitioner of the right to file a suit for refund of double duty.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Salem vs. Principal Conservator of ForestsExplained¶16
Salem vs. Principal Conservator of Forests (AIR 1966 SC 249) · Who else cites this
R.M. Lackmi v. Sri LankaExplained¶16
R.M. Lackmi v. Sri Lanka
P.V. Rangaraj v. Principal Conservator of ForestsExplained¶16
P.V. Rangaraj v. Principal Conservator of Forests (AIR 1966 SC 249) · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Saram Apegila Nagas
Jabalpur Municipality
Prashant Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
