SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1980 Supreme(AP) 200

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : PUNNAIAH
Chintala Chittayya - Appellant
Versus
Superintendent of Excise, Khammam - Respondent
Decided On : 08-01-80

The deeming provision in rule 21 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Lease of Right to Sell Liquor in Retail) Rules, 1969 is not applicable to cases where the auctions were held in October and the counterpart agreements were executed within 15 days from the date of auction.

Headnote:

EXCISE - LEASE OF RIGHT TO SELL LIQUOR IN RETAIL - AUCTION PURCHASER - LIABILITY TO PAY RENTALS - PERIOD FOR WHICH LICENCE NOT GRANTED - DEEMING PROVISION IN RULE 21 OF ANDHRA PRADESH EXCISE (LEASE OF RIGHT TO SELL LIQUOR IN RETAIL) RULES, 1969 - APPLICABILITY - EXPLANATION TO SECTION 17 (1) OF ANDHRA PRADESH EXCISE ACT, 1968 - EFFECT.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner became the highest bidder in respect of Dammapet Tribal group of arrack shops in the auction held on 4-10-1979. He executed a counterpart agreement on 17-10-1979 and was granted a license on 18-10-1979. The petitioner paid the rentals from 18-10-1979 to 31-10-1979. The 1st respondent issued a notice demanding payment of rentals for thirty-one days for the period from 1.10.79 to 31.10.1979, as the petitioner did not pay the rentals from 1st October, 1979 to 17th October, 1979.

Finding of the Court:

The petitioner is not liable to pay the rentals for the period from 1st October to 17th October in respect of the shop for which the auction was held on 4th October. The deeming provision in rule 21 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Lease of Right to Sell Liquor in Retail) Rules, 1969 is not applicable to the petitioner's case as the auction was held in October and the petitioner executed the counterpart agreement within 15 days from the date of auction. The deeming provision is applicable only to cases where the auctions were held in September and the counterpart agreements were not executed within the time specified in the proviso to rule 21.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is liable to pay the rentals for the period from 1st October to 17th October in respect of the shop for which the auction was held on 4th October.

Ratio Decidendi: The lease for the sale of liquor granted to the auction purchaser shall not take effect until he obtains a license from the licensing authority. (Rule 22 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Lease of Right to Sell Liquor in Retail) Rules, 1969) A lease shall not take effect until the Collector or any other competent officer has issued a license under this act. (Explanation to Section 17 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968) The deeming provision in rule 21 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Lease of Right to Sell Liquor in Retail) Rules, 1969 is applicable only to cases where the auctions were held in September and the counterpart agreements were not executed within the time specified in the proviso to rule 21.

Final Decision: Writ petitions allowed. No costs.

PUNNAYYA, J.

( 1 ) IN all these writ petitions common questions of law are involved. Hence they can be disposed of together.

( 2 ) IT is sufficient if the facts in W P No, 7429/1979 are narrated. The petitioner became the highest bidder in respect of Dammapet Tribal group of arrack shops in the auction held on 4-10-1979. the highest bid being Rs. 13,000/-

( 3 ) THE petitioner signed his name in the register maintained for the purpose under rule 15 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Lease of right to sell liquor in retail) Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the rules ). He paid 2% of the annual rental as earnest money together with one month s rental on the day of the auction immediately after the acceptance of his bid under rule 16. He also deposited three months rental in fixed deposit certificate of the Scheduled Bank taken for the period of lease within fifteen days from the date of auction under rule 18. The petitioner paid the advance as required by rule 19 within 15 days of the acceptance of the bid. The petitioner executed a counterpart agreement on 17-10-1979 ie. within 15 days from the date of auction in Form A 2 on the stamp paper before taking out licence in in respect of the lease granted to him for the sale of liquor under rule 21. Since he complied with all the formalities as required by rules 15 16, 18, 19 and 21 he was granted licence on 18-10-1979. He paid the rentals from 18-10-1979 to 31-10-1979. Since the petitioner did not pay the rentals from 1st October, 1979 to 17th October, 1979 the 1st respondent issued notice on the petitioner demanding payment of the rentals for thirty one days for the period from 1. 10 79. to 31. 1o. 1979.

( 4 ) WHEN the auction purchaser is not permuted to carry on business till 18th when he is granted licence, is the petitioner liable to pay the rental from 1st October till 17th October in respect of the shop for which the auction was held on 4th October.

( 5 ) THE learned Government Pleader submits that since the excise year is from 1 st October to 30th September and it commences from 1st october and the auctions of the arrack shops were conducted for the excise year and the auction-purchaser executes the counter-part agreement for that year, even though the auction was held subsequent to 1st October, and the auction purchaser is bound by the terms of the counter-part agreement which he executed, the lease should be deemed to have come into force on 1st October and hence he is bound to pay the rentals from 1st October and the auction-purchaser is not permittted to say that he is not liable to pay the rentals for the period for which he has no licence or that he has not carried on business. In support of his contention, he relied upon the provisions of Rule 21.

( 6 ) SRI Dasaratharamaiah, on the other hand, contends that the petitioner is not liable to pay the rental from 1st October to 17th October and the deeming provision provided in rule 21 and referred to by the learned government Pleader is applicable to cases for which auctions were held in September and is not applicable to the auctions held in October or in subsequent months. He further contends that rule 21 is subject to explanation to Section 17 (1) read with rule 22, He, therefore, contends that the lease shall take effect only from the date when the licence is granted and it shall not take effect till then and hence the auction-purchaser is not liable to pay the rentals for the period for which he has no jicence.

( 7 ) BEFORE I examine which of the contentions is entitled to acceptance, i feel it necessary to mention here the relevant sections and rules governing the matter.

( 8 ) SECTION 17 (1) of the ANDHRA PRADESH EXCISE ACT, 1968, 1968 gives power to the Government to grant lease. It reads as follows : "17 (1 ). The Government may, subject to such conditions as they may deem fit to impose, grant for a fixed period to any person at any place a lease jointly and severally for the supply, manufacture or sale of any
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top