RAJKUMAR GAJADHAR PRASAD Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question that arises in this appeal is on the interpretation of Section 31 (1-A) of M. P. Excise Act, 1915, which I quote :

(2.) PLAINTIFF has appealed as his suit has been decreed in part only in which he had prayed that the recovery warrant issued against him for realisation of Rs. 34,539. 50 be declared void. Trial Court has granted him partial relief and there is no appeal by the State. Admittedly, the warrant was issued for recovery from the plaintiff of kists of duty due payable by him under liquor licence issued to him along with the revenue loss which the defendant/state suffered on account of resale of two shops which had been settled with the plaintiff.

(3.) IT is not denied and the fact found admitted is that there was default on the part of the plaintiff in regard to non-payment timely of the kist due under the licences, Exs. P.-l and P-2. Admittedly also, order was passed on 23-8-1976 (Ex. P-6) cancelling the licences. Indeed, resale is also admitted but the fact of the matter is that the first sale proved abortive as the bid was found low. There was second sale and admittedly the revenue loss accruing from the second sale has only been saddled on the plaintiff. Admittedly the resale amount of the subsequent or second bid was higher than the earlier bid.