9911796707
TMI Blog1967 (3) TMI 107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indlays Bank Ltd. and it was accepted by this court and the Sales Tax Officer. We shall presently refer to the terms of this guarantee which was executed by the Bank on March 23, 1962. Dr. Kaul died and the writ petition was placed before this court on March, 15, 1965. On that date the minutes record : The court made no order as the writ petition has abated due to the death of the petitioner. 2. On November 25, 1965, the State of Maharashtra moved Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 331 of 1966. It was stated that the order of stay had come to an end and the amount of ₹ 18,240.06 p. which had by addition of interest become ₹ 19,581.50 p. became payable. The State, therefore, sought to recover the amount from the guarantor. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 p., without prejudice to the application for directions pending in this court. The bank further stated that an amount of ₹ 18,411.97 p. was standing to the credit of the late Dr. M.N. Kaul with the bank. The bank offered to remit the amount in answer to the notice under Section 17 of the Sales Tax Act provided the bank guarantee was cancelled and discharged. The notice of March 11, 1966, was made an annexure of the affidavit. 4. The C.M.P. was placed before the court on March 23, 1966, when the legal representatives of Dr. Kaul were ordered to be joined and the bank was ordered not to pay the amount to anyone including the Sales Tax Officer. One R.N. Kaul (brother of Dr. M.N. Kaul) was brought on record as the legal representativ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me Court of India and/or the said court holding that Dr. M.N. Kaul, Delhi, is liable to pay the sales tax ₹ 18,240.06 np. (Rupees eighteen thousand two hundred and forty and six naye paise only) to the said respondent. AND THE NATIONAL AND GRINDLAYS BANK LIMITED, DELHI, declares that this guarantee shall remain in force until one calendar month after the date of the pronouncement of the Judgment and/or a period of TWELVE MONTHS from the date of the execution of the GUARANTEE whichever is later and/or the drawing AND SEALING OF THE ordER (as the case may be) of the SUPREME COURT finally disposing of the said petition filed by Dr. M.N. Kaul of Delhi. 6. The question is whether this guarantee is enforceable. That depends upon the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the pronouncement of the judgment and/or (ii) (a) a period of 12 months from the date of the execution of the guarantee whichever be later and/or (b) the drawing and sealing of the order (as the case may be) of the Supreme Court finally disposing of the petition of Dr. Kaul. 9. The sales tax authorities can take advantage of any of the above conditions. It will be recalled that the order of this Court was passed on March 15, 1965. Under (i) time for enforcement was available till April 15, 1965. Under (ii) (a) as the guarantee was executed on March 23, 1962, one year expired on March 23, 1963. Condition (ii) (b) does not apply because no order was drawn up or sealed. Thus the last date for enforcement of the guarantee was April 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
