Allowed

Tamil Nadu State Transport v. Settukumar

Madras HC10 Oct 2011CRP(MD)/1339/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Civil Revision Petition challenged an order by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal regarding income tax deductions in an award execution. The High Court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order, and remitted the matter to the Tribunal as it failed to apply the Income Tax Act correctly.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 12.04.2011 passed in E.P.No.9 of 2008 is set aside and the matter remitted to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to decide on the basis of the Income Tax Act.

Tamil Nadu State Transport Vs Settukumar — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.10.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM C.R.P(NPD)(MD)No.1339 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011

¶3

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Through its Managing Director, Pudukottai. .. Petitioner/Respondent

¶4

Vs. Settukumar .. Respondent/Petitioner

¶5

Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 12.04.2011 passed in E.P.No.9 of 2008 in M.C.O.P.No.396 of 2003 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Fast Track Court, Pudukottai.

¶6

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Gokul

¶7

For Respondent : No Appearance

¶8

ORDER

¶9

The order dated 12.04.2011 passed in E.P.No.9 of 2008 in M.C.O.P.No.396 of 2003 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Fast Track Court, Pudukottai is being challenged in the present Civil Revision Petition.

¶10

The respondent herein as petitioner has filed M.C.O.P.No.396 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Fast Track Court, Pudukottai, wherein the present revision petitioner has been shown as sole respondent. In M.C.O.P.No.396 of 2003 an executable award has been passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the same has been put into execution in E.P.No.9 of 2008. During pendency of the same, the respondent/petitioner has filed a calculation memo and the petitioner/ respondent has also filed another calculation memo and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has ultimately allowed the calculation memo filed on the side of the respondent/petitioner. Against the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

¶11

Even though the respondent has been served with summons appearance has not been made. Under the said circumstances, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of on merits on the basis of the contentions put forth on the side of the revision petitioner.

¶12

The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has contended that as per the Income Tax Act, the respondent/petitioner is liable to pay income tax and only on that basis some amounts have been deducted towards income tax and remitted to the Income Tax Department. Under the said circumstances, a detailed calculation memo has been filed on the side of the revision petitioner. But the Court below without considering the relevant sections of the Income Tax Act, has erroneously allowed the calculation memo filed on the side of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respondent/petitioner and therefore, the impugned order passed by the Court below is liable to be set aside.

¶13

¶14

As stated earlier, the respondent/petitioner has filed M.C.O.P.No.396 of 2003, wherein an executable award has been passed and the same has been put into execution in E.P.No.9 of 2008. On the side of the revision petitioner a calculation memo has been filed, wherein some amounts have been deducted towards income tax as per the relevant sections of the Income Tax Act. But the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has simply stated that for a period of four years no taxable income has been in existence. The reason given by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is not proper and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is bound to decide the present dispute only on the basis of the relevant Sections of the Income Tax Act and further, on the side of the revision petitioner representation has not been made before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and therefore viewing from any angle, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the matter is liable to be remitted to the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

¶15

In fine, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed without costs and the order dated 12.04.2011 passed in E.P.No.9 of 2008 in M.C.O.P.No.396 of 2003 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Fast Track Court, Pudukottai is set aside and the matter is remitted to the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Fast Track Court, Pudukottai. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Fast Track Court, Pudukottai is directed to pass suitable orders on the basis of the relevant Sections of the Income Tax Act and also directed to proceed further. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶16

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CO) /True copy/

¶17

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶18

¶19

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Fast Track Court(Additional District Judge), Pudukottai.

¶20

Copy to

¶21

The Record Keeper, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶22

¶23

SR : 09.11.2011 : 2p/3c

¶24

C.R.P(NPD)(MD)No.1339 of 2011 10.10.2011

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Tamil Nadu State Transport v. Settukumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tamil Nadu State Transport v. Settukumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Seenivasan @ Karuppiah Vs Kalyanasundaram Chettiar

Tamil Nadu State Transport Vs P. Rajaram

Royal Sundaram Alliance Vs Kalimuthu

Sabruhan Beevi Vs Tamilnadu Ashpestos and Cement

Alagar, S/O.Mari, Vs Chellachamy, S/O.Ponnuthevar

A.Mohammed Ali Vs S.Srinivasan