9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Interpretation of provisions under the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 regarding toll collection and exemption. - Validity of the Government order exempting toll for goods meant for Government use. - Jurisdiction of civil court in claims for refund of toll paid. - Compliance with procedural requirements for claiming toll refund. Interpretation of Provisions under U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916: The case involved the appellant transporting goods for the Government through a toll barrier in Ghaziabad. The U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916, allowed the Municipal Board to impose taxes, including tolls on vehicles. The State Government could exempt certain persons or goods from these taxes. A specific order exempted goods meant for the Government from toll payment, subject to a refund process upon becoming Government property. Validity of Government Order Exempting Toll: The Government order exempted toll for goods intended for Government use, outlining a procedure for refund upon becoming Government property. The appellant followed this procedure by obtaining a certificate from the Garrison Engineer, indicating the goods' Government purpose. The appellant then sought a refund from the Municipality, which was declined, leading to a legal action for the refund. Jurisdiction of Civil Court in Toll Refund Claims: The appellant's claim for toll refund was deemed a civil matter enforceable unless barred by law or statutory provisions. The civil court's jurisdiction was not excluded by the Act's provisions, and the claim was not subject to limitation periods or statutory extinguishment. The court clarified that the dispute did not pertain to valuation or assessment, allowing the civil court to entertain the claim for toll refund. Compliance with Procedural Requirements for Toll Refund: The rules framed by the Government outlined a procedure for claiming toll refund, including a timely application with original receipts. Failure to comply could result in the Municipality denying the refund, prompting recourse to a civil suit. The court emphasized that these procedural requirements did not constitute conditions precedent to the civil court's jurisdiction but were steps for the Municipality to follow in granting refunds. In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's decree and restoring the trial court's decree for toll refund with costs. The judgment clarified the interpretation of relevant provisions, the validity of the Government order exempting toll, the jurisdiction of civil courts in toll refund claims, and the procedural requirements for claiming toll refunds.
|
