NARAYAN CHANDRA GHOSE Vs. ANANDA BISNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are five cases of Reference under amended Section 113, Civil P. C., by a Small Cause Court Judge of Garhbeta arising out of five Small Cause Court suits filed in his court. The point referred by the learned Judge for decision by this Court is identical in all the cases and the plaintiff is also the same in all the suits. The facts of the cases are also similar. The relevant facts have been stated in the Letter of Reference made by the Judge and as between the different cases there is some variation only with regard to amounts, no useful purpose will be served by setting forth at length the facts of the different cases in detail. Briefly, the plaintiff who is a wholesale dealer sold sugar to retail dealers from his stock as on 23-10-46. Owing to certain reasons he could not realise excise duty on such sales from the defendant's retail dealers. He was, however, compelled to pay excise duty himself. He has accordingly brought the suits for the recovery from the retail dealers of the amount of excise duty realised from him by Government.

(2.) The learned Judge is of opinion that Section 3, Central Act 9 of 1947 is invalid because of the following reasons:

(3.) In support of such conclusion the learned Judge has purported to rely on the principles laid down by a Bench of this Court in the case of -- 'Subodh Gopal v. Behari Lal', when dealing with the validity or otherwise of certain provisions in the Bengal Sales (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1950.