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

1961 Supreme(MP) 78

P.V.DIXIT, K.L.PANDEY
N. K. DOONGAJI – Appellant
Versus
COLLECTOR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.L.KHASKALAM, Y.S.DHARMADHIKARI

DIXIT, C. J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners in this case are all liquor contractors holding licences for the manufacture and sale of country liquor. On 3rd and 4th November 1960 the divisional Forest Officer, Korea Division sent to the Tahsildar, Baikunthpur, requisitions for recovery of certain amounts from the petitioners as forest dues. The forest dues were stated to be on account of mahua leaves and fuel taken by the petitioners from certain forest coupes for the manufacture of liquor. The recovery of the amount was sought as arrears of land revenue. The petitioners drew the attention of the respondents to the decision of this Court in Surajdin laxman v. State of M. P. , 1960 MP LJ 39 : (AIR 1960 Madh Pra 129) and pointed out that under that decision the recovery of the forest dues over and above the amount at which their bids were accepted for grant of licences was illegal. The respondents, however, persisted in their demand. The petitioners have now filed this application contending that the recovery sought to be made from them has no statutory basis whatsoever. They pray that the requisitions and recovery warrants issued against them, and the recovery proceedings initiated, all be qu








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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top