The Executive Officer, Velur Town Panchayat vs Varadarajan

Krishhaswamy Reddy, J.—This appeal has been preferred by the Executive Officer, Velur Town Panchayat, against the order of acquittal of the Respondent by the Sub-Magistrate, Paramathi. The Appellant filed a private complaint against the Respondent under Ss. 178(2) and 181 of the Madras Panchayats Act on the allegation that the Respondent failed to pay the rent of Rs. 1,742 for the bunk shop No. 2 in Velur bus stand as per the lease deed executed by him. It is not in dispute that the respondent has not paid the entire amount due to the Panchayat. But, however, he admits that a sum of Rs. 800 was due to the Panchayat. The only question that arises in this case, as pointed out by the Sub-Magistrate, is whether the prosecution for non-payment of the lease amount can be sustained. This Court has held in Gnanasikamony v. Palukkal Panchayat AIR 1970 Mad. (Sep. part) page, that the amount due under a contract such as lease cannot come within the mischief of Notification No. 52 made under Clause (xxii) of Sub-section (2) of Ss. 178 of the Madras Panchayat Act, 1958. The learned Sub-Magistrate acquitted the Respondent following the decision abovesaid. I do not find any reason to differ from that decision and in any event, it cannot be said that the Order of acquittal by the Sub-Magistrate is incorrect. The appeal is dismissed.