AMAR SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is directed against the concurrent decisions of the Courts below, dismissing the Plaintiffs suit.

(2.) THE Plaintiff brought the present suit for recovery of Rs. 100 already recovered by the State of Punjab from him and for a permanent injunction against the State restraining it from recovering a sum of Rs. 2,250 in respect of tax on truck No. P.N.E. 886. The tax in question was imposed under the Punjab Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1924 (Punjab Act 4 of 1924). Section 3 of the Act deals with imposition of the tax. The tax under this section is leviable on every motor vehicle in equal instalments for quarterly periods and is payable upon a licence to be taken out and paid for under the provisions of this Act by the person who keeps the motor vehicle for use. Under Section 4 of this Act a person who keeps a motor vehicle for use is obliged to fill up and sign a declaration in the prescribed form, stating the prescribed particulars, and shall deliver the declaration as filled up and signed by him to the licensing officer before the 30th day of April, 1925, or if such person commences to keep the vehicle after the 10th day of April, 1925, then before the expiration of 21 days from the day of his commencing to keep the vehicle for use. Under Section 7 "every licensing officer shall grant and deliver to every person who pays to him the first instalment of tax due, a license in which shall be specified the particulars of the tax paid, * * * * * *" Section 8 provides the penalties for omission to comply with the provisions of Section 4. The arrears of tax under Section 11 are recoverable as arrears of land revenue. Under this Act the relevant rule which need be noticed is Rule 13, which is in these terms - -

(3.) IN the present case, initially the truck was purchased by Amar Singh Plaintiff and he paid tax in respect of this vehicle up to the third quarter of 1948 -49, i.e., up to the 31st of December, 1948. According to Amar Singh, he sold the struck to Mian Singh, Chanan Singh and Amar Singh of Naroo in PEPSU and also gave them the permit and in view of this sale he never paid the tax thereafter. He received a notice for the fourth quarter of 1948 -49 to the second quarter of 1952 -53, whereby tax for all this period was demanded from him. The Plaintiff on the 29th of September, 1952, sent an application by post to the licensing authority intimating to it that he had sold the truck in September, 1948 and that no tax or penalty should have been imposed on him. The licensing authority took the stand that as no intimation of the transfer had been given to it the liability to pay tax rested with the Plaintiff. On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed: