(1.) Heard the parties. This is an application in revision on behalf of the Municipal Committee, Ajmer, from the order of the revisional Court below upholding the order of the trial Court that a second application should not be maintained for recovery of taxes and other claims under S. 234 of Regulation VI [6] of 1925. The section runs as below :
(2.) It appears that the first application made by the Municipal Committee for recovery of the tax was dismissed in default of appearance on behalf of the Municipal Committee by the trial Court on 4-8-1949. The Municipal Committee thereafter put in a second application in the matter. The trial Court rejected it also holding it to be barred under S. 403, Criminal P. C. The revisional Court below held that the first application having been rejected, the Magistrate was within his rights to stay his hands and refuse to entertain a fresh application and that the Municipal Committee still had a remedy open to it by way of a regular suit before a competent Civil Court. There appears to be no reason for me to hold otherwise. Even if it be taken for granted just for arguments' sake that technically the Municipal Committee could have put in a fresh application, then I do not see as to why in such a petty matter the accused-applicant be summoned again and again for no fault of his and harassed. The Municipal Committee has still a remedy open to it by way of a regular suit before a competent Civil Court. It may, however, be mentioned here that the provision of the law as laid down under S. 403, Criminal P. C., has no application to the facts of the present case.
(3.) The application in revision accordingly is dismissed.