SYED KAMROOL Vs. BHADRAK TOWN GRAMA PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an unsuccessful Plaintiffs appeal against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Balasore, dismissing his suit. The Plaintiff commenced a suit for a permanent injunction for restraining the Defendant, the Bhadrak Town Grama Panchayat, from collecting certain registration fees on the sale of cattle from the sellers in a Hat situated within its jurisdiction. He also claimed a sum of Rs. 300/ - as damages.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are those: The Plaintiff is the sixteen annas owner of the land in dispute having inherited the same from his mother. A Hat is held on that land every Wednesday where cattle are brought for purposes of sale. The Defendant by their notification dated 27 -1 -1954 wanted to realise the registration fees from the sellers of cattle in that Hat, the fee being one piece per rupee on the sale -proceeds. In pursuance of this notification, the Defendant began to collect registration fees from 3 -2 -1954. The Plaintiff thereupon severed a registered notice dated 1 -2 -1954 on the Defendant through his pleader which the Defendant received on 4 -2 -1954. This notice purported to have issued under Section 110 of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act (Orissa Act 15 of 1948) intimating the Plaintiff's desire to bring a suit for perpetual injunction against the Defendant. The Plaintiff thus filed the suit, contending that the constitution of the aforesaid Gram Panchayat is illegal and the Defendant, a corporate body, not having been duly constituted, the action taken by it was against the law and accordingly, the Defendant is not entitled to make any realisation from the sellers in the Hat held on the private land of the Plaintiff.

(3.) THE trial court on a consideration of the issues as framed by him, decreed the suit in part restraining the Defendant from enforcing compulsory registration of cattle sold in the Hat on the ground that the Bhadrak town Gram Panchayat though has been properly constituted and is entitled to realise fees for registration of cattle sold in the Hat, yet cannot compel such registration but were only entitled to realise fees voluntarily paid by the parties who voluntarily register the transaction in the register of Grama Panchayat. Against this decision, the Defendant Grama Panchayat carried an appeal and the Plaintiff also filed a cross -appeal contending that the suit should have been decreed in full, and the Defendant should have been restrained from realising any fee at all whether voluntary or otherwise. The appellate court, however, came to a different finding disagreeing with the trial court and held that the Defendant Grama Panchayat was entitled to levy and collect fees and accordingly dismissed the Plaintiff's suit, and I the cross -appeal