Partly allowed

State of Punjab and Ors. v. M/S Krishna Grain Products P Ltd. and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Feb 2009LPA/113/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a Low Interest Order allowing 6% interest on delayed Levy Rice payments. The Bench allowed the appeal only in part, exempting the State from interest on Kharif 2001-02 but mandating 6% interest on subsequent payments.

What did the court decide?

Interest at 6% per annum excluded for Kharif 2001-02 but mandated for subsequent periods; 10% penalty interest for delay beyond two months.

State of Punjab and Ors. Vs M/S… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

L.P.A. No.113 of 2008

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Date of Decision : 18.02.2009

¶5

State of Punjab and others versus

¶6

M/s Krishna Grain Products Pvt. Ltd. & Others

¶7

.....Appellants

¶8

.....Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL.

¶10

Present : Mr.Manoj Bajaj, Sr.DAG, Punjab, and Mr.Hari Pal Verma, Advocate, for appellants.

¶11

Mr.D.D.Bansal, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2, 4, 5, 11 & 12. Mr.Anil Kshetarpal, Advocate, for respondent Nos.3 & 6.

¶12

-.-

¶13

UMA NATH SINGH, J.

¶14

This Letters Patent Appeal arises out of a judgment dated 8.1.2008, passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in C.M.No.8288 of 2006 and C.W.P.No.15770 of 2002, allowing the writ petition with direction to pay the interest @ 6% per annum on delayed payment of the cost of levy rice, deposited with the Central Pool of Food Corporation of India, by the Government of Punjab. In the impugned order, learned Single Judge has referred to various orders passed in different writ petitions filed in 2004 onwards.

¶15

While arguing the matter, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, placed reliance on an order dated 18.2.2002, passed by a Division Bench of this Court in C.W.P.No.18969 of 2002, which on reproduction, reads as:-

¶16

L.P.A. No.113 of 2008

¶17

¶18

“....This is a petition for issuance of a mandamus directing the respondents to pay the amount due to the petitioners out of the Central Pool Levy under Punjab Rice Procurement (Levy) Order 1983. In the reply filed on behalf of respondent No.3 and 4, in the form of affidavit of Sh.Balwant Singh Brar, District Food and Supplies Controller, Ropar, it has been stated that a sum of Rs.11,71,35,272/- has been paid to petitioners vide different cheques issued between 6.11.2001 to 24.1.2002.”

¶19

According to learned State counsel, once the respondents showed their acquiescence in accepting the amount and did not raise a demand for interest or any other demand, it would not be open for them to re-agitate the point on the basis of subsequent judgment passed by this Court. Moreover, this is also a submission of learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab that on calculation, the interest amount may work out to be around Rs.10 lacs and only for a little procedural delay in calculating the amount, the public exchequer should not be made to suffer by paying this huge interest amount.

¶20

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents submitted that even though the parties agreed to receive the amount as per order dated 18.2.2002, but in respect of delayed payments made thereafter, they are certainly entitled to claim interest amount. This submission of learned counsel for respondents appears to carry force to that extent.

¶21

In view of all the aforesaid, we partly allow this appeal to the extent that the State of Punjab shall not be burdened to pay the interest @ 6% per annum on delayed payments of cost of Levy Rice for the period Kharif 2001-02, but in respect of payments due and made thereafter, the

¶22

L.P.A. No.113 of 2008 3

¶23

respondent Nos.2 to 6, 11 and 12 would be entitled to get the interest @ 6% per annum which would be finally calculated by the authorities concerned. The payment so calculated shall be released within a period of 2 months from the date of receiving a copy of this order, failing which respondents shall be entitled to get further interest @ 10% per annum on the payments made beyond the aforesaid period of two months.

¶24

With the aforesaid directions, this LPA is disposed of.

¶25

(UMA NATH SINGH) JUDGE

¶26

18-02-2009 (A.N.JINDAL) Mohinder JUDGE

¶27

Whether this judgment be referred to Reporter or not ? YES/NO

State of Punjab and Ors. v. M/S Krishna Grain Products P Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Punjab and Ors. v. M/S Krishna Grain Products P Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Financial Commissioner and Ors. Vs Sadhu Singh

Union of India Vs State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and Ors.

Baldev Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

UOI Vs Mange Ram etc.

Mahavir Sehrawat Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab State Fed. of Coop. House Vs Financial Commissioner and Ors.