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

1980 Supreme(Ker) 271

Judges : T.KOCHU THOMMEN
BABY - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA - Respondent
Case No : O.P. No. 4405 of 1979
Decided On : 12/01/1980
Advocates Appeared :
O.V. Radhakrishnan; K. Radhamani Amma; For Petitioner Government Pleader; For Respondents

The main legal point established is that S.9 of the Welfare Fund Act allows recovery of amounts due from employers in the same manner as an arrear of land revenue, and S.65 of the R. R. Act is applicable for recovery of money due under the Welfare Fund Act in cases where the conditions of the section are satisfied.

Headnote:

Kerala Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Act - Liability of Employer - S.65 of Kerala Revenue Recovery Act - S.9, S.65, S.68 of Welfare Fund Act and S.2(j), S.3 of Revenue Recovery Act

Fact of the Case:

The court considered whether an employer can be arrested under S.65 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act for amounts due under the Kerala Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Act. The petitioner objected to the notice issued by the District Collector and argued that the Welfare Fund Act amounts are not public revenue due on land and thus S.65 of the R. R. Act does not apply.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that S.9 of the Welfare Fund Act allows recovery of amounts due from employers in the same manner as an arrear of land revenue, even though the amounts do not assume the character of land revenue. The court also clarified that S.65 of the R. R. Act is applicable for recovery of money due under the Welfare Fund Act in cases where the conditions of the section are satisfied.

Issues: The issues involved the interpretation of S.9 of the Welfare Fund Act and S.65 of the R. R. Act, and whether the District Collector had jurisdiction to issue a warrant for the arrest of the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the recovery of amounts due under the Welfare Fund Act is enforceable in the same manner as an arrear of land revenue, even though the amounts do not assume the character of land revenue. The court also clarified that S.65 of the R. R. Act is applicable for recovery of money due under the Welfare Fund Act in cases where the conditions of the section are satisfied.

Final Decision: The Original Petition was dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek appropriate relief in the event of being aggrieved by any order made under S.65 by the District Collector.

Judgment :-

1. The question for consideration is whether an employer from whom amounts are due under the Kerala Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1969 ('the Welfare Fund Act') is liable to be arrested under S.65 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968 ('the R. R. Act'). The petitioner is an employer from whom a sum of Rs. 25,771/-is said to be due under the Welfare Fund Act. Notice was accordingly issued to him by the District Collector in terms of S.65 of the R. R Act. The petitioner filed his objections to the notice, but the Collector has not yet issued a warrant for his arrest.

2. Counsel for the petitioner Shri. O. V. Radhakrishnan says that the District Collector has no jurisdiction to issue warrant for the arrest of the petitioner in respect of a liability which has arisen under the Welfare Fund Act. This contention is based on the assumption that amounts due under the Welfare Fund Act are not public revenue due on land and therefore S.65 of the R. R. Act can have no application. Counsel points out the distinction between S.9 of the Welfare Fund Act and S.28 of the Abkari Act. While the former provision does not say that moneys due under the Act are deemed to be public revenue due on land, the latter provision says that moneys due under the Act are treated as if they were arrears of land revenue. Based on this distinction counsel says that, in the absence of a deeming provision, money due under the Welfare Fund Act cannot be treated as if they were arrears of land revenue For recovery of such amounts, counsel says, S.65 of the R. R. Act can be of no avail.

3. S.9 of the Welfare Fund Act reads:

"9. Mode of recovery of moneys due from employers: Any amount due from the employer in pursuance of the provisions of this Act or the scheme may, if the amount is in arrear, be recovered in the same manner as an arrear of land revenue."

(emphasis supplied)

This provision may be contrasted with S.28 of the Abkari Act, the relevant portion of which reads:

"All duties, taxes, fines and fees payable may be recovered as if they were arrears of land revenue"

S. 9 of the Welfare Fund Act provides that money due under the Act can be recovered "in the same manner" as an arrear of land revenue. It is true that unlike in S.28 of the Abkari Act, the arrears under the Welfare Fund Act are not treated as if they were arrears of land revenue. In other words, the amount due under the Welfare Fund Act, unlike in the case of the Abkari Act, does not in its nature or quality assumme the character of land revenue, but it retains the original character of money due under the Welfare Fund Act. But its recovery is enforceable in the same manner as an arrear of land revenue.

4. S.65 of the R. R. Act provides for arrest in certain cases of default as one of the modes of forcing the defaulter to pay the money. If the District Collector is satisfied that there has been wilful default or dishonest or fraudulent conduct on the part of the defaulter or he has the means to pay, but neglects to do so, and in other circumstances mentioned under the Section, the Collector has the power to issue a warrant for the arrest of the defaulter. The object of this provision is to compel the defaulter to pay the debt and not to punish him. (Collector of Malabar v. Erimmal Ebrahim Hajee - AIR. 1957 SC. 688).

5. S.65 of the R. R. Act is attracted only when there are arrears of public revenue due on land. However S.68 of this Act is applicable for recovery of certain other amounts due to the Government. It says:

"68 Application of the Act for the recovery of certain other dues to Government. (i) All sums declared by any other law for the time being in force to be recoverable as arrear of public revenue due on the land or land revenue:... ... ... ...may be recovered under the provisions of this

This means that, if by any other law amounts are recoverable as arrears of public revenue due on land or land revenue, such amounts fall within the ambit of S.68, and are therefore attracted by all









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