(1.) The four appellants were carrying on business in partnership & for non payment of a sum of Rs. 1,01,716.27 due from them as sales tax, they were prosecuted before the First Class Magistrate, Ponkunnam, who convicted & sentenced them to pay fines. The Magistrate specified in the order the amount of tax which they had failed to pay. Thereafter a warrant was issued by the Magistrate to the Collector, Kottayam, for recovering the amount and the latter sought execution of the same in the District Court, Kottayam, by attachment and sale of their properties. The appellants filed objections and the two points raised by them in the court below were:
(2.) The point pressed in appeal is that the warrant which was sought to be executed was issued without jurisdiction. Execution was applied for in this case under S.386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which provides as follows:
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants relied on the decision in In Re Lachanna ( AIR 1953 Mad. 332 ). That was a revision petition by the accused from an order of conviction for a similar offence under the Madras General Sales Tax Act. The conviction was set aside by the High Court, not because the firm was not an accused in the criminal prosecution but as some of the partners of the firm alone were prosecuted. Reference may be made in this connection to an earlier decision of the Madras High Court in In Re Akula Paddayya (1947-11-MLJ. 255) in which the two persons who constituted the firm were prosecuted. Chandrasekhara Aiyar, J., observed: