Dismissing a writ petition challenging an order demanding interest for belated payment of a bid amount in an arrack shop sale, the court held that the relevant 1981 notification was unchallenged and binding, making the petitioner liable to pay the notional interest.
Petitioner granted eight weeks time to pay interest as demanded; no costs.
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 THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE : 01.06.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
W.P.No.552 of 2015 &
M.P.No.1 of 2015
K.Chinnasamy ... Petitioner
Versus
Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records in the order passed by the third respondent vide Order Ref.No.NA.KA.7775/83/F2, dated 25.11.2014 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and unjustifiable.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Thiyagarajan, Senior Counsel For Mr.S.Ramesh Kumar
For Respondents : Mr.R.Lakshmi Narayanan Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R
Heard Mr.A.Thiyagarajan, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr.S.Ramesh Kumar, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.Lakshmi Narayanan, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepting notice on behalf of respondents.
2.The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ quashing the order passed by the third respondent dated
25.11.2014, demanding interest for the belated payment for the notional loss caused on account of the belated payment of the bid amount in respect of Arrack Shop No.26/83-84, Vadamugham Vellode Village, Perundurai Taluk.
3.The petitioner would contend that the interest is not leviable, since the interest is demanded based on the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.81 Prohibition and Excise Miscellaneous Department dated 05.04.2004, and if at all interest is payable, it is only after issuance of the Government Order.
4.This contention raised by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner does not merit acceptance owing to the fact that interest is demanded for belated payment by virtue of the notification issued by the Government, published in the official gazette which has come into effect from 12.05.1981. As long as the said Notification has not been challenged by the petitioner, he is bound to remit the interest. Further more, the petitioner should have paid the entire amount without any default and the petitioner having committed default, notional loss had arisen and the petitioner does not dispute the same. However, the only question to be decided in this Writ Petition is whether the petitioner is liable to pay the interest on the said amount ?
5.In the light of the fact that the Notification levying interest, which has come into effect fro 12.05.1981, has not been challenged, the petitioner has to remit the notional interest as demanded. Accordingly, I find no merit in the Writ Petition and the same is dismissed. Petitioner is granted eight weeks time to pay interest as demanded. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
r p a
To
Erode - 638 001. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
+1cc to Mr.S.Ramesh Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.28990 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.29204
W.P.No.552 of 2015 & M.P.No.1 of 2015
GR(CO) CA(10/06/2016)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is liable to pay interest on the bid amount due to belated payment for notional loss.
Whether the Government Notification levying interest effective from 12.05.1981 was unchallenged and binding on the petitioner.
Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of the order demanding interest has any merit.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
K. Chinnasamy
The Commissioner and Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department
The District Collector, Erode District
The Divisional Excise Officer, Erode Taluk Office Compound
T.S. Sivagnanam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
