SRINIVAS MULL Vs. SECRETARY OF STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of an action in which the plaintiffs claimed from the Secretary of State a sum of Rs. 2500 which they contended had been illegally assessed upon them, Government purporting to act under Section 15, Police Act, 1861, as amended by the Act of 1922. The action, was dismissed in limine as it was held by the Court below that Section 80, Civil P.C., had not been sufficiently complied with. The contention in support of that decision by the learned Government Pleader is that by the notice purporting to be under Section 80 the plaintiffs have not sufficiently stated their cause of action.

(2.) The case made out in the plaint, it appears, is shortly this that the Deputy Magistrate purporting to act for the District Magistrate under Sub-section (4) of Section 15 had made the apportionment and issued the notice, whereas the Section demanded an apportionment and notice by the Magistrate of the District. Now, by the notice which the plaintiffs gave under Section 80 they stated as follows in para. 5: That the Deputy Magistrate purporting to act for the District Magistrate of Monghyr has served a notice upon my client dated 27 July 1933 making a demand of Rs. 2600-12-0 as an apportioned amount payable by him for up-keep of the additional police force there.

(3.) The learned Government Pleader, acting on a number of well-known decisions on the question of what is a cause of action has contended that what was necessary in the notice was a statement of the facts which went to make up the plaintiffs cause of action. The decision most often quoted with regard to what is meant by the expression cause of action is in Cooke V/s. Gill (1873) 8 C.P. 107 where Bovill C.J. and two other Judges were considering the question whether certain cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of Lord Mayor's Court of the City of London, and in the course of the judgment by Brett, J., this statement was made: Cause of action has been held from the earliest time to mean every fact which is material to be proved to entitle the plaintiff to succeed.