1983 (7) TMI 34

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uidated. But the father of the plaintiff was again called upon by the Certificate Officer by letter dated January 15, 1957, to pay a sum of about Rs. 1,500 by way of interest on the arrears of income-tax which was assessed against him. The appellant put in his objection which was disallowed and a distress warrant was issued against him for recovery of the said dues by the Certificate Officer. The objection that was raised was that this amount was an illegal demand after the payment of the dues by instalments on the basis of the order of the Certificate Officer and same not being a public demand, was not recoverable under s. 16 of the Public Demands Recovery Act and, therefore, the proceeding initiated against the plaintiff's father and othe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act, no fresh certificate for the claim was signed or issued, but demand was made by letter dated January 15, 1957. So, there can be no question of cancellation of any certificate for realisation of the present claim for interest. The other prayer was for declaration that the payment of interest in the proceeding for recovery thereof is illegal and ultra vires. According to the learned judge, the disputes were entertainable by a civil court and he held that the prayer for such a declaration is maintainable. No objection was raised by the debtors to the demand and, in fact, they admitted the liability and prayed for payment of the dues by instalments. Accordingly, the Certificate Officer made an order fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... recovery of the interest in respect of the certificate filed under the Act. Therefore, no fresh certificate of demand need be signed or put into execution and the dues are recoverable in the proceeding which is a continuation of the same proceeding started on the certificate issued on the original demand. Hence, it was held by the learned judge that the procedure was in conformity with the law and, accordingly, overruled the objections made by the appellants. Two cases, however, have been cited by the learned advocate for the appellant in support of his contention that the proceedings are not legal namely, Khardah Co. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1969 Cal 284. In this case also there was no dispute about the original certificate amo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that would be merely postponing the evil day. The question, therefore, is as to whether interest, costs and charges are at all payable. We have to come back to s. 16 because that is the most important section that creates the liability to pay interest, costs and charges. Mr. Bhabhra interprets it to mean that the liability to pay interest, costs and charges is subject to the existence of execution proceedings. In other words, when the principal sum due on a certificate is paid at a time when no execution proceeding is actually pending, the liability to pay interest, costs and charges do not accrue. In my view, this is not correct interpretation of s. 16. Under s. 16, interest, costs and charges are payable with regard to the public deman....