MOHINDRA CRANKS PVT LTD Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case, the petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the respondent-Municipal Committee from recovering any octroi from the petitioner. In the alternative, the plaintiff prayed for declaration to the effect that the respondent-Municipal Committee can recover octroi if any according to Head 93 (1) under category 12 of the Punjab Government Gazette Extra Ordinary Notification dated 10. 1. 1994 at the rate of 0. 1% ad valorem. Along with the suit, the plaintiff/petitioner filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC for issuance of ad interim injunction. The said application was partly allowed by the learned Sub Judge Second Class, Rajpura, vide his order, dated 27th October, 1995 and the learned trial court directed that the respondent-Municipal Committee shall be entitled to recover octroi at the rate of 0. 1% ad valorem and not at the rate of Rs. 45.00 per quintal as demanded by the respondent-Municipal Committee. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the respondent-Municipal Committee filed an appeal which was allowed by the learned District Judge, Patiala vide his order dated 10th September, 1997. By this Order, the learned District Judge, Patiala, dismissed the application of the petitioner/plaintiff filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, CPC.

(2.) MR . Vinay Mittal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the plaintiff Company did not receive crank shafts forging for consumption use or sale and after machining and finishing, the raw material was returned back to its customers. He, therefore, contended that no octroi was recoverable from the plaintiff company. In the alternative, he submitted that the crank shafts forging was an agricultural machinery and under head 93 (1) category 12 of the Notification mentioned above, the defendants could recover at the rate of 0. 1% from the plaintiff-company. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel placed reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in S. M. Ram Lal and Co. v. Secretary to Government of Punjab and Ors. , 1969 Current Law Journal 458.

(3.) IN view of the above discussion, I do not find any merit in the above petition and the same is dismissed.