AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Sathasivam, J.—The Petitioner has approached this Court to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to pay the Petitioner a sum of Rs. 1 lakh being the prize money on Lottery Ticket No. B 163359 won by the Petitioner in the Parasmani Lottery 108th draw held on 3.1.1988 and Rs. 10,000/- on the counterfoil of the said ticket with interest at the rate of 12 per cent from 3.1.1988 till date of payment on various grounds.
According to the Petitioner the Indian Red Cross Society Respondents 1 to 3 herein is a Society set up under Indian Red Cross Society Act, 1920. The said society is a part of the International Red Cross Society and is engaged in various types of Charitable, relief and other works. The Red Cross also organised lotteries in order to raise funds for itself. One such lottery was the Parasmani Lottery, in which the Petitioner purchased a ticket in the B series No. 163359 of the 108th draw held on 3.1.1988. He purchased the said ticket from the 4th Respondent. The Adhirstam newspaper carried the results of the abovesaid lottery and he was happy to find that he has won the first prize of Rs. 1 lakh. It is further stated as per the Rules he deposited the said ticket within 30 days with the UCO Bank, i.e. on 25.1.1988 for collection of the prize amount from the Indian Red Cross Society. The counterfoil of Rs. 10,000/- was also deposited. Till date the first Respondent has evaded payinng the prize money of Rs. 1 lakh and Rs. 10,000/- due to the counterfoil. He also addressed a letter to the General Secretary, Indian Red Cross Society, Calcutta informing about the deposit of the lottery ticket and counterfoil and also addressed a letter to the Governor of West Bengal. However, no payment was made by any of the Respondents. On 6.7.1988 the UCO Bank intimated the Petitioner that their representative had deposited the winning lottery ticket at The Indian Exchange Place Branch with the Indian Red Cross Society on 25.1.1988 and payment is yet to be received. Even a lawyer''s notice has not produced any reply. The various lotteries are run under the supervision of the respective States concerned In as much as the Petitioner did not receive any favourable reply with regard to early payment of the prize money, he has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition.
The second Respondent filed a counter statement wherein it is contended that the first Respondent is not a necessary party for the adjudication and no order be passed against the first Respondent. It is also stated that the writ petition is not maintainable because the Red Cross Society is not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, It is also stated that the impunged proceeding is purely a commercial transaction and not a transaction conducted by a Statutory Agency exercising statutory powers. If there is any breach in the contract, the proper remedy for the party complaining the breach is to file a suit. A writ cannot be filed for recovering moneys due under a commercial transaction It is further stated that the lottery conducted by the Indian Red Cross Society, Calcutta, West Bengal has nothing to do with the Indian Red Cross Society, Monteith Road, Madras-8 which is arrayed as the third Respondent in the above writ petition. One of the terms and conditions printed on the reverse side of the ticket is that the legal jurisdiction of this lottery is Calcutta only. Therefore the Petitioner is not entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Hon''ble Court and file this writ petition. Apart from this, regarding merits, it is contended that the Petitioners claim for Rs. 1,10,000/- together with interest is not sustainable. It is also stated that even if the Petitioner is entitled to prize money less 10 per cent to be deducted for the selling organisation and 40 per cent of the balance to be deducted for Income Tax. Therefore, the Petitioner would at the most be entitled to Rs. 54,000/- (Rs. 1,00,000 minus Rs. 10,000 and minus 36,000/- for income tax). It is further stated that the sole selling agent of the lotteries one M/s. S.S. and Company of Calcutta has to pay to the second Respondent more than Rs. One crore and the non-payment has completely upset the financial balance of the second Respondent organisation. It finds the day-to-day management of the second Respondent organisation, extremely difficult on account of the financial loss caused by the said S.S. and Company. Arrangements are being made to recover the amounts and it will not be possible for the second Respondent to pay any prize for the tickets sold by the said S.S. and Company. With these averments they prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.
The 4th Respondent has filed a formal counter affidavit wherein he has stated that only in respect of small prizes below Rs. 5,000/- as per the arrangements the prize holders can claim the money from them and if the prize money is above Rs. 5,000/- they have to contact the respective Government directly. With these averments the 4th Respondent contended that the present writ petition against him is liable to be dismissed.
In the light of the above pleadings, I have heard Mrs. Ammu Balachandar, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mrs. Prabha Sridevan learned Counsel appearing for the second Respondent, Mr. S.R. Sundaram, learned Counsel appearing for the third Respondent and Mr. S. Doraisamy, learned Counsel appearing for the 4th Respondent.
There is no dispute that the lottery ticket B. 163359 purchased by the Petitioner is the prize winning ticket in the Parasmani Lottery 108th draw held on 3.1.1988. It is the grievance of the Petitioner that knowing that the said ticket secured first prize, as per the Rules i.e. within 30 days he deposited the said ticket with U.C.O. Bank 5th Respondent herein on 25.1.1988. In spite of several correspondence with the Respondents 2 to 5, according to him Respondents 2 and 3 did not settle the amount. In the counter affidavit filed by the second Respondent it is not disputed that the fact that the said ticket was the prize winning lottery ticket floated by the second Respondent. However, it is contended that because of the non-payment of more than Rs. one crore by one S.S. and Company, Calcutta and due to financial crises, they are not in a position to make payment. This aspect has been specifically admitted by the second Respondent in their counter affidavit. Since the said portion is relevant the same is extracted hereunder: para 4 reads thus:
This Respondent submits that the sole selling agent of the lotteries one M/s. S.S. and Company of Calcutta has to pay this Respondent more than Rs. One crore and the non-payment has completely upset the financial balance of this great organisation. This Respondent finds the day-to-day management of this organisation, extremely difficult on account of the financial loss caused by the said S.S. and Company. Arrangements are being made to recover the amounts and unless and until the amounts are recovered, it will not be possible for this Respondent to pay any prizes for the tickets sold by the said S.S. and Company.
The above factual position shows that there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the lottery ticket referred in the writ petition is the prize winning ticket and the Petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs. 1 lakh as prize money. No doubt, it is open to the Respondents 2 and 3 to deduct allowable amount from the said sum of Rs. 1 lakh.
Even though the second Respondent has not disputed the payment of the amount as claimed by the Petitioner minus allowable deductions, faint argument was advanced that the proper remedy for the Petitioner would be only to file a civil suit and not the writ petition as filed by the Petitioner. I am unable to accept the said contention, since Indian Red Cross Society is a Society set up under the provisions of Indian Red Cross Society Act, 1920. If that is so, there is no difficulty in holding that Indian Red Cross Society is a ''State'' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and amenable to writ jurisdiction.
The other contention raised by the learned Counsel appearing for the second Respondent is that at any rate this Court has no territorial jurisdiction. The said argument is also not acceptable, since it is not disputed that the lottery tickets floated by Indian Red Cross at Calcutta were sold all over India and one of the office of the Red Cross Society is also situate at Madras. The Petitioner who is residing within the jurisdiction of this Court purchased the lottery ticket floated by Indian Red Cross Society at Calcutta and the said ticket is the prize winning ticket. Apart from this the liability has not been disputed by the second Respondent. As a matter of fact, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has brought to my notice the various correspondence between the Petitioner and the second Respondent, wherein the second Respondent has requested the Petitioner to go over to Calcutta for negotiation and settlement. The said factual position has not been disputed by the second Respondent. In the light of the above factual position, I am of the view that this Court can issue appropriate writ with regard to the claim made by the Petitioner. In the light of the said factual position, the decisions referred to by the learned Counsel appearing for the second Respondent viz., Daya Shanker Bhardwaj Vs. Chief of the Air Staff, New Delhi and Others, and Oil and Natural Gas Commission Vs. Utpal Kumar Basu and Others, are not helpful to him. Apart from this after insertion of Article 226(2), in view of the fact that part of the cause of auction arose within the teritorial jurisdiction of this Court, there is no doubt that this Court has ample jurisdiction to issue appropriate direction to the second Respondent.
With regard to claim for interest, no doubt the second Respondent has delayed the matter. However, taking note of the fact that the Red Cross Society is engaged in various types of charitable relief and other works and fighting for alleviation of various human problems during war, floods, earth-quake and so on and also taking note of the fact that their sole selling agent viz. M/s. S.S. and Company, Calcutta owed considerable money to the second Respondent and of the financial position as explained in their counter affidavit, I am not granting any interest as claimed by the Petitioner.
Under these circumstances, the Petitioner is entitled to succeed in part and there shall be a direction, directing the second Respondent to pay the Petitioner a sum of Rs. 1. Lakh being the prize money of lottery ticket No. B.163359 won by the Petitioner in the Parasmani lottery 108th draw held on 3.1.1988 less allowable deduction as per law within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order either from this Court or from the Petitioner whichever is earlier.
The Writ Petition is allowed to the extent mentioned above. No costs, Consequently, WM Ps.27067/90 and 17834/93 are closed.