9911796707
TMI Blog1954 (1) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed by the plaintiff. The suit is primarily and essentially for a declaration of title to property which the plaintiff claims as her own; and which title is disputed by the defendants, and particularly by defendants Nos. 1 and 2. Now, the plaintiff has nothing to do with payment of Income Tax in this suit and this is not a matter concerning revenue nor is she herself concerned in anyway with any order of assessment or enforcement or collection of Income Tax in pursuance of any order made against her father. That the suit was occasioned by some act done or ordered on behalf of defendant No. 1 is no doubt a factor which compelled the plaintiff to come to Court. But I do not see how the reason or motive which induced or forced the plaintiff to file this suit can affect the nature of the suit. Unless persuaded by some sound principle of law or compelled by any over-riding authority I am not prepared to read anything in Section 226(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935, as depriving this Court of the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction to try a suit for declaration of title to any property which a person claims as his own and which title is disputed by the Government. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pect of acts done by the servants of the East India Company in collecting revenue of Bengal to which the company was entitled by virtus of the grant of Divani . As the preamble to the first enactment of the Parliament in the matter, 21 Geo. III, c. 70, indicates that legislation was passed by the Parliament for the purpose of preventing the interference of the Supreme Court in revenue matters. I have no doubt that in deciding the question of the plaintiff's title I would not be interfering with any revenue matter or any order concerning collection of the same, I am not aware of any principle of construction which would lead me to the conclusion that this antiquated fossil which remained on the) statute book till our Constitution came into existence should be so interpreted as to affect third parties who had nothing to do with revenue or revenue authorities. In my, judgment it would be contrary to all principles of justice to deprive third parties from seeking relief from this Court by giving any wider meaning to Section 226(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935, than that strictly necessary having regard to the nature of the subject-matter and the language expressly used by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... brought an action of trespass in the Supreme Court of Bombay against the Collector and one of his subordinate officers. The defence in the suit was that the suit related to a matter which concerned revenue or an act done in the collection of revenue and therefore the Supreme Court at Bombay had no jurisdiction. That plea was ultimately accepted by the Privy Council. Relying on this decision Mr. Joshi has argued before me that in that case the act of the Collector affected a third party. I do not think Mr. Joshi is right in his submission. An examination of the report clearly shows that arrears of pension could be collected from the property itself and the Collector had a right under the laws then in force to proceed against the property in respect of any arrears of pension and that right could be enforced even against the successor-in-title. Besides, part of the arrears had accrued after Harkissandas became owner of the property. Therefore, in that case there was no question of applying the provisions of 21 Geo. III, c. 70, Section 8, which is in pari materia with Section 226(2) of the Government of India Act, 1935, to a third party who had nothing to do with revenue or the collect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appropriate Legislature made by virtue of powers conferred on that Legislature by this Constitution, the jurisdiction of, and the law administered in, any existing High Court, and the respective powers of the Judges thereof in relation to the administration of justice in Court, including any power to make rules of Court and to regulate the sittings of the Court and of members thereof sitting alone or in Division Courts, shall be the same as immediately before the commencement of the Constitution : Provided that any restriction to which the exercise of original jurisdiction of any of the High Courts with respect to any matter concerning the revenue or concerning any act ordered or done in collection thereof was subject immediately before the commencement of this Constitution shall no longer apply to the exercise of such jurisdiction. The proviso in express terms removes the restriction to the exercise of the jurisdiction of High Courts in matters concerning revenue. That bar, therefore, no longer survives. It is true that the Constitution had not come into force when the suit was filed, but the provisions of Section 226(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935, relate, in m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... administering it. I am bound by and am also in respectful agreement with the law so laid down. Mr. Joshi had only a feeble answer to this aspect of the case. Learned Counsel referred to Article 395 and Article 367(1) of the Constitution. They are as follows ,: 367 (1). Unless the context otherwise requires, the General Clauses Act, 1897, shall, subject to any adaptations and modifications that may be made therein under article 372, apply for the interpretation of this Constitution as it applies for the interpretation of an Act of the Legislature of the Dominion of India. 395. The Indian Independence Act, 1947, and the Government of India Act, 1935, together with all enactments amending or supplementing the latter Act, but not including the Abolition of Privy Council Jurisdiction Act, 1949, are hereby repealed. Mr. Joshi next referred to Clauses (b), (c)and (e) of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act and an argument was advanced that the effect of those clauses was that the provisions contained in Section 226(7) of the Government of India Act, 1935, continued to apply to the present suit. Learned counsel particularly relied on Clause (e) of Section 6 of the Act. Now, as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
