SUDHIR AGARWAL, SHAMSHER BAHADUR SINGH
SURESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY – Appellant
Versus
RAJKIYA AUDYOGIC EVAM KRISHI PRADARSHANI – Respondent
By the Court.—Heard Sri J.J. Munir, learned counsel for petitioner and perused the record.
2. It is contended that Exhibition Committee, though is managed personally by officers of District Administration but in fact it is a private registered society and neither a Department of Government nor Corporation. It is also not incorporated in statute. Therefore, respondents have no authority to recover amount payable by petitioner to above society, as arrears of land revenue and demand of recovery of aforesaid amount as arrears of land revenue is patently without jurisdiction since Section 3 of Uttar Pradesh Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act 1972’) has no application.
3. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondents status of Exhibition Committee has not been replied at all.
4. Section 3 of Act 1972 reads as under :
“Recovery of certain dues as arrears of land revenue—
(1) Where any person is party-
(a) to any agreement relating to a loan, advance or grant given to him or relating to hire purchase or goods, sold to him by the State Government or the Corporation, by way of financial assistance; or
(b) to any agreement relating to a loan, a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.