9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (2) TMI 466X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o in due course rendered an award in favour of the contractor. The contractor instead of instituting an appropriate proceeding in Uttar Pradesh where the contract was executed and the work was carried out, instituted a proceeding on the original side of the Delhi High Court. By this proceeding the contractor prayed for making the award a rule of the Court under sections 14 and 17 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940. The respondent raised a plea to the effect that the Delhi High Court had no Jurisdiction inasmuch as the cause of action had arisen at a place in Uttar Pradesh and that the contract was also executed at Bareilly in Uttar Pradesh. The learned Single Judge negatived this plea. The respondent Union of India preferred a letters pate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or gain through the Director of Supplies and Disposals, New Delhi to confer jurisdiction on the courts at Delhi. The answer has to be in the negative. The expression "voluntarily resides" in Section 20 is significant. It necessarily refers to natural persons and not to legal entities. Likewise, the expressions "carries on business" or "personally works for gain" do not refer to functions carried on by the Union of India in discharge of its executive powers conferred by Article 298 of the constitution. While Article 299 of the Constitution provides that all contracts made in the exercise of the executive power of the Union shall be expressed to be made by the President Clause (2) of this Article states that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant was an 'abkari' contractor for certain villages in the district of Nalgonda. A penalty of ₹ 9,767/8- was imposed on him by the Excise Superintendent for the alleged tapping of 145 toddy and 500 Sindhi trees without paying the excise duty. After he failed in his appeal to the Collector and the Excise Commissioner and his representation to the Minister, he filed a suit at Hyderabad impugning the levy of penalty as ultra vires, illegal and void. It was urged that as the Government enjoyed monopoly in regard to 'abkar' business it should be deemed to be carrying on business at Hyderabad within the sweep of Section 20 C.P.C. The contention was rejected. The Court said: We consider that in gathering the revenues ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... poration of Calcutta; and Other (1960 AIR 1355, 1961 SCR (1) 158). In this case at the instance of the Corporation of Calcutta, summons under Section 488 of Bengal Act III of 1923 as substituted by the later Act XXXIII of 1951 were issued by the Director of Rationing and Distribution representing the Food Department of the Government of West Bengal. The offence complained of was the "using or permitting to be used" certain premises for purposes of storing rice without a licence. By way of preliminary objection the contention raised was that the prosecution was not maintainable in law. An argument was raised on behalf of the Corporation that the State as recognised by Article 300 of the Constitution was a legal person and was capab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt reflected in the aforesaid passages. Learned counsel for the appellant has urged that the Delhi High Court has not properly appreciated the ratio of the decision of this Court in Union of India v. Laddu Lal Jain A.I.R. 1964 (3) SCR 624. We are unable to accede to this argument. We concur with the view of the High Court that the decision in Laddu Lal Jain's case is inapplicable in the back drop of the facts of the present matter. In Laddu Lal Jain's case the Court was concerned with the activity carried on by the Railway Administration which was held to be "business" activity. The Supreme Court has drawn a distinction between the commercial activities of the State on the one hand and the discharge of the sovereign funct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
