STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. MANOHAR DUTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Regular Second Appeal had been preferred by the State of Punjab against the judgment and decree dated 5.9.1977 of the trial Court, and affirmed by the first appellate Court vide order dated 30.11.1978, whereby the suit of the plaintiff was decreed for declaration to the effect that he is the owner and in possession of the shop in dispute.

(2.) In brief, the facts are that Sham Lal, defendant No. 3, was a liquor vendor during the year 1968-69. Certain arrears of excise revenue fell due from him which he was unable to pay. The Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner Patiala, in order to recover the said arrears attached the shop in dispute on 6.2.1976. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that he is owner and in possession of the shop in dispute and the attachment effected on 6.2.1976 by Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Patiala defendant No. 2, for effecting recovery of excise arrears as arrears of land revenue due against Sham Lal, defendant No. 3, is null and void and ineffectual as against his title and interest in the said property, and the said property is not liable to be auctioned or otherwise dealt with for the recovery of arrears. The plaintiff also averred in the said plaint that shop was purchased by him from defendant No. 3 vide registered sale-deed dated 5.8.1968 for a consideration of Rs. 12,000/-. He further stated that he purchased the said shop/a valuable consideration in good faith and the same is not liable to be attached for recovery of excise arrears as arrears of land revenue, due against defendant No. 3.

(3.) The suit was contested by State of Punjab and Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Patiala, defendant Nos. 1 and 2 respectively, on the ground that the sale-deed was executed collusively by defendant No. 3 in order to defraud the Government of its dues. There was no legal necessity of selling the property by defendant No. 3 and moreover, the sale is in favour of plaintiff who is the sister's son of defendant No. 3. The trial Court on the basis of pleading of parties, framed the following issues :-