STATE OF HARYANA Vs. RAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendant's second appeal against whom suit for declaration and injunction has been decreed by both the courts below.

(2.) RAM Singh, plaintiff, brought a suit on the allegations that the sales tax authorities had assessed the recovery of Rs. 4,450 from the business concern styled as Darshan Singh Ram Singh, Panipat. It was pleaded that the State wanted to proceed againstrhim for the recovery of the said amount on the ground that he was a partner and the said business concern was a partnership firm. It was alleged that the plaintiff had nothing to do with the said business concern which was neither a firm- nor was the plaintiff a partner. It was further pleaded that, in fact, the assessment was made against Darshan Singh, his brother, in his individual capacity and not against any firm styled as Messrs. Darshan Singh Ram Singh. Although the plaintiff was the brother of Darshan Singh but he had nothing to do with the business which his brother Darshan Singh was carrying on. The State contested the suit mainly on the ground that the civil court had no jurisdiction in the matter. It was also maintained that the plaintiff was a partner in the defaulter-firm. Both the courts below found that the civil court bad the jurisdiction to try the suit and that the plaintiff was not the partner of the firm known as Messrs. Darshan Singh Ram Singh and he had nothing to do with the same. With these findings, the suit was decreed.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the defendant-appellant contended that the civil court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. The only remedy which the plaintiff had to seek was under the Sales Tax Act. In support of tin's contention fie referred to a Division Bench judgment of this Court in R. S. A. No. 669 of 1972 (Haryana State v. Savitri Devi) decided on 4th December, 1973. It was further contended that it had been wrongly found that the plaintiff was not the partner of the defaulter-firm.