Bombay High Court
Gati Corporation Limited vs City Of Nagpur Muncipal ... on 5 December, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
0512WP437.2000-Judgment 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 437 OF 2000
PETITIONER :- Gati Corporation Limited, a Public Limited
Company, registered under the Companies
Act, 1956 at 1-7-293, Mahatma Gandhi
Road, Secunderabad (Andhra Pradesh),
represented by the Manager (Legal), P.Uma
Shankar, aged 29 years, resident of House
No.6-1-365, New Bhoiguda, Secunderabad
ig (Andhra Pradesh).
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS :- 1. City of Nagpur Municipal Corporation,
through the Municipal Commissioner, Civil
Lines, Nagpur.
2. The Municipal Commissioner, Municipal
Corporation, Civil Lines, Nagpur.
3. Shei Siddique, Deputy Municipal
Commissioner (Octroi), City of Nagpur
Municipal Corporation, Civil Lines, Nagpur.
4. Shri Ambulkar, Octroi Superintendent, City
of Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.Amit Khare, counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.J.B.Kasat, counsel for the respondents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 05.12.2016
0512WP437.2000-Judgment 2/4
O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt. Vasanti A Naik, J.)
By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order of
the Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur dated 05/01/2000 dismissing the
application filed by the petitioner under Sec.156(1)(b) of the City of
Nagpur Corporation Act after holding that the order of imposition of the
penalty on the petitioner, was justified.
2. The petitioner is a public limited company engaged in the
occupation of cargo management products. M/s. Soni Enterprises of
Nagpur imported surgical goods worth Rs.3,13,704/- from Bhiwandi.
The goods were unloaded at the hub centre at Wadi. According to the
petitioner, the petitioner had paid full octroi duty of Rs.12,552/- and an
acknowledgement receipt in regard to the payment of octroi to the
aforesaid extent was issued in favour of the petitioner. However, it was
found by the octroi officials that the petitioner had paid only the duty of
Rs.552/- and it was fraudulently shown that the amount of Rs.12,552/-
was paid. An enquiry was conducted in the matter and after finding that
the petitioner had deposited octroi to the tune of Rs.552/- and had
evaded the payment, the petitioner was fastened with a liability to pay
the penalty to the tune of Rs.1,25,552/-. Being aggrieved by the said
decision, the petitioner filed an application under section 156(1)(b) of
the Act before the Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur. The Municipal
Commissioner, however, by the impugned order dated 05/01/2000
dismissed the application filed by the petitioner.
0512WP437.2000-Judgment 3/4
3. Shri Khare, the learned counsel for the petitioner,
submitted that the petitioner had indeed paid a sum of Rs.12,552/-
towards octroi and the petitioner could not have been fastened with the
liability for the act of the agent of the petitioner. It is stated that the
octroi receipt clearly shows that an amount of Rs.12,552/- was paid by
the petitioner towards octroi and the imposition of the penalty on the
petitioner was not proper.
4.
Shri Kasat, the learned counsel for the Corporation,
submitted that a clear finding of fact is recorded by the Municipal
Commissioner that there was interpolation in the octroi receipt,
inasmuch as the two digits were added before the amount of Rs.552/-
that was deposited by the petitioner to make a show that the petitioner
had deposited the octroi of Rs.12,552/-. It is stated that it was apparent
from a perusal of the octroi receipt that the said document was
fabricated and the matter was duly investigated by the authorities and it
was found that the octroi receipt was fabricated to show that an amount
of Rs.12,552/- was deposited though only an amount of Rs.552/- was
credited in the account of the Nagpur Municipal Corporation. It is stated
that the finding of fact recorded by the Municipal Commissioner in
respect of the fabrication of the document may not be interfered with,
in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. It is stated that during the pendency
of the writ petition, the amount of penalty is paid by the petitioner and
the order of the Municipal Corporation is implemented.
0512WP437.2000-Judgment 4/4
5. It appears on hearing the learned counsel for the parties
that a clear finding of fact is recorded by the Municipal Commissioner
that the octroi receipt was fabricated with a view to make a show that
the petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs.12,552/- towards octroi
though the petitioner had only deposited a sum of Rs.552/- towards
octroi. Even if the agent or servant of the petitioner was responsible for
the mischief, the petitioner is liable to pay the penalty, as the amount of
Rs.12,552/- was not credited to the account of the Nagpur Municipal
Corporation. Since the pure finding of fact recorded by the Municipal
Commissioner cannot be lightly interfered with, in exercise of the writ
jurisdiction, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
6. Hence, we dismiss the writ petition with no order as to
costs. Rule stands discharged.
JUDGE JUDGE
KHUNTE
