MAQSOOD ALI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant is the legal representative of Syed Ibdatali. He had some transport business operating in the Holkar State as well as part of British India, in the old territory of Madhya Pradesh. As per rules existing in the then Holkar State Ibdatali had to deposit Rs. 682/8/ - in stamps with the transport authorities for the permit some time in 1943. Subsequent to deposit of these stamps there was an understanding between the authorities of British India and the Holker State by which payment of tax in both the States was dispensed with and the permit issued by one Government was to be valid for the other. Though it is not specifically stated it appears that syed Ibdatali had paid the necessary amount in British India and therefore he was exempted from the payment of the permit fee in the Holker State. The agreement between the Holker State and British India authorities came into force on 1 -1 -1944.

(2.) IT is not disputed that the usual mode of payment of permit fee was in the shape of purchasing stamps and depositing the same with the transport authorities, which Ibdatali had done as already stated in 1943. In view of the above agreement between the two States, the Transport Authorities could not retain the stamps. The stamps were therefore returned to said Ibdatali in the year 1946 with an endorsement dated 16 -1 -1946 directing him to obtain refund of deposit from the revenue authorities, Holker State. The legal representative of said Ibdatali there upon made an application to the Subha on 12 -12 1947 but was unsuccessful in getting the money back. A review application dated 3 -1 -49 was also dismissed. A suit has therefore been brought by the Appellant against the State Government after giving due notice for the refund of Rs. 682/8/ -. Originally Government of Madhya Bharat was a party, but after the re -organisation, the Sate of Madhya Pradesh has been made Respondent in this case.

(3.) THE appellate Court agreed with the trial Court that the claim was barred, but it held that Article 97 Limitation Act would apply to the facts of the case. According to it the cause of action was in the year 1944 when both the Government of Holker State and British India came to an agreement that payment in one State would be sufficient for the purpose of plying in other territory. The limitation being three years the suit was barred by time.