Back
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
R. S. BACHAWAT, D. N. SINHA, P. N. MUKHERJEE
UNION OF INDIA (UOI) - Appellant
Versus
MANMUL JAIN - Respondent
A. F. A. O. 95 Of 1952
Decided On : APRIL 17, 1962
CHANDERNAGORE - TAXATION - JURISDICTION - DISTRICT JUDGE - APPEALS FROM SUBORDINATE JUDGE - COMPETENCY - FRENCH FINANCIAL DECRET OF DECEMBER 30, 1912 - APPLICABILITY - SUMMARY CASES - MAINTAINABILITY - REGULAR SUITS - REMEDY.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the imposition of duty on the consumption of petrol in Chandernagore, a former French territory transferred to India in 1950. The municipal assembly of Chandernagore passed resolutions imposing the duty, and the percepteur and receveur municipal issued commandments to the respondents to pay the duty. The respondents filed oppositions to the commandments, challenging their validity and legality. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the oppositions, but the District Judge set aside the orders and granted a declaration that the commandments were illegal and ultra vires. The Union of India appealed to the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the District Judge was not competent to hear appeals from the orders passed by the Subordinate Judge in the opposition cases because the orders were not decrees or orders passed in suits or in proceedings arising out of suits. The Court also held that the Subordinate Judge could not assume jurisdiction to decide cases under the French Financial Decret of December 30, 1912, as the French courts and laws ceased to exist after the promulgation of the Chandernagore (Application of Laws) Order 1950. The Court further held that the assessees were at liberty to challenge the legality and validity of the taxes and commandments by regular suits.
Issues: 1. Whether the District Judge was competent to hear appeals from the orders passed by the Subordinate Judge in the opposition cases? 2. Whether the Subordinate Judge could assume jurisdiction to decide cases under the French Financial Decret of December 30, 1912? 3. Whether the assessees were at liberty to challenge the legality and validity of the taxes and commandments by regular suits?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The District Judge was not competent to hear appeals from the orders passed by the Subordinate Judge in the opposition cases because the orders were not decrees or orders passed in suits or in proceedings arising out of suits. Section 21(1) of the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887, which conferred appellate jurisdiction on the District Judge, did not apply to such orders. 2. The Subordinate Judge could not assume jurisdiction to decide cases under the French Financial Decret of December 30, 1912, as the French courts and laws ceased to exist after the promulgation of the Chandernagore (Application of Laws) Order 1950. The Indian Laws did not empower the Subordinate Judge to entertain summary opposition cases under the French procedural laws and to give declaratory relief in those cases. 3. The assessees were at liberty to challenge the legality and validity of the taxes and commandments by regular suits, as the orders passed by the Subordinate Judge and the District Judge in the opposition cases were null and void.
Final Decision: The High Court dismissed the appeals and allowed the alternative applications under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The orders passed by the District Judge and the Subordinate Judge in the opposition cases were set aside, and the assessees were permitted to institute regular suits challenging the legality and validity of the taxes and commandments.
( 1 ) THE City of Chandernagore was until lately a French territory. On November 18, 1949, the municipal assembly of Chandernagore passed a resolution imposing duty on the consumption of petrol at the rate of one anna six pies per gallon. On May 1, 1950 the Central Government of India in exercise of its powers under Section 4 of the Foreign Jurisdiction Act, 1947 promulgated the Chandernagore (Application of Laws) Order, 1950 and appointed an Indian administrator of Chandernagore with effect from May 2, 1950. De facto power with regard to the territory was transferred by the French Republic to the Government of India on May 2, 1950. On December 23, 1950 the municipal assembly of Chandernagore passed a resolution imposing a duty on the consumption of petrol at the rate of four annas per gallon with effect from January 1, 1951. The percepteur and receveur municipal of Chandernagore issued "commandments" upon the respondents commanding them to pay the moneys said to be due from them on account of the duty on petrol since January 1, 1951 whereupon notices of "opposition" to the commandments were issued at the instance of the respondents calling upon the percepteur to appear before the Subordinate Judge, Chandernagore. The oppositions challenged the validity and legality of the imposition of duty and of the commandments and prayed for consequential declaration and injunction. The respondents to appeal No. 93 of 1953 also filed a petition under article 808 of the French Civil Procedure Code praying for stay of the "commandment" proceedings. By several orders passed in August, 1951 the subordinate Judge dismissed this petition as also the oppositions in the other cases on the ground that they were not maintainable. On appeal on November 10, 1951, the District Judge of Chandernagore set aside these orders, sent back the opposition cases to the Subordinate Judge for decision according to law; held that the oppositions were maintainable in the Civil Courts as summary cases. Thereafter by orders dated March 10, 1952 the subordinate Judge dismissed the opposition cases; he held that the impositions of duty as also the commandment proceedings were lawful and valid. On fresh appeal on June 16, 1952 the District Judge set aside these orders. He held that the impositions of duty were not lawful and valid and granted a declaration that the commandments in each case were illegal, ultra vires and incapable of execution. In the meantime on June 9, 1952 the city of Chandernagore was transferred in full sovereignty to India. On June 30, 1952 the President of India in exercise of his powers under Article 243 (2) of the Constitution promulgated the Chandernagore Administration Regulation, 1952. On September 9, 1952 the Union of India preferred these appeals from the order of the District Judge dated June 16, 1952 and also filed alternative revision petitions under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. On the same day the Union of India filed applications for leave to present and prosecute the appeals in place of the percepteur and municipal receveur of Chandernagore; those applications were allowed by an order of this Court dated August 11, 1954. The Calcutta High Court (Extension of Jurisdiction) Act, 1953 was passed on December 18, 1953 extending the jurisdiction of the High Court at Calcutta to Chandernagore as from May 2, 1950. The Chandernagore (Merger) Act passed on September 24, 1954 came into force on October 2, 1954. All these appeals and revision petitions have been referred to this Bench under chapter II Rule 1 proviso (ii) of the Appellate Side Rules.
( 2 ) THE Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887 subject to a specified modification of section 4 thereof and the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 were by paragraph 3 of the Chandernagore (Application of Laws) Order, 1950 applied and extended to the free city of Chandernagore and by paragraph 7 of this order all laws then in force in Chandernagore corresponding to th
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
