SUNNY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Appeals are filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge holding that Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal has no powers to entertain the claim of the appellant that he is an indigent person eligible to file appeal under Order XLIV of CPC without payment of court - fee. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellants and Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(2.) Counsel for the appellants has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Smt. Darshana Devi, 1979 KHC 157 : AIR 1979 SC 855 : 1979 KLT 269 : 1979 (2) SCC 236 and contended that Order XXXIII as well as Order XLIV giving powers to Civil Court to permit filing of suits and appeals by parties as indigent persons without payment of court - fee, apply to Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. On going through the judgment above referred, we find that it is rendered in the context of a claim petition filed under the MV Act before the MACT without payment of court - fee. Supreme Court held that since MACT has the trapping of a Civil Court, it has all the power under Order XXXIII contained in the CPC. However, we do not think the decision applies here because determination of compensation under the MV Act by MACT is almost in the same manner Civil Court decides civil suits. In fact Civil Judges are notified as MACTs and the purpose of constitution of the Tribunal is for early disposal of cases. In fact, prior to constitution of MACTs, suits for damages under the MV Act were decided in civil suits by Civil Courts. However, so far as Sales Tax Act is concerned, it is a statute providing for levy and collection of tax and the powers of the authorities are found in the statute itself. S.53 gives only limited powers to the Appellate Authority, revisional authority and the Tribunal. For easy reference we extract hereunder the said Section: