High CourtsSingle Bench(1958) 12 MAD CK 0009

The Public Prosecutor vs N.T. Kathirvelu

Madras High Court · Decided on 12 December 1958 · Citation: AIR 1959 Mad 518 : (1959) CriLJ 1444

HON’BLE JUDGES
Somasundaram, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 276 of 1958

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 344 words

Somasundaram, J

1.

This is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of the respondent on a charge of not paying the tax due for the quarter. There is no doubt

about the fact that on 4-10-1955 the lorry in question, i.e., M. D. J. 832 was found on the road. It was noticed by the Inspector and on

subsequent verification it was found that the tax for the vehicle was not paid for the quarter.

2.

It may also be stated that M. D. J. 2025, another vehicle, has been substituted for this vehicle, as this vehicle was condemned as unfit for use,

and for the vehicle M. D. J. 2025 tax has been paid for the entire quarter. The question is whether the payment of tax for the entire quarter for the

subsequent vehicle exonerates the payment of tax for the vehicle M. D. J. 832, which was found on the road on 4-10-1955.

3.

The finding of the vehicle on the road on the 4th shows that this vehicle used the road, and when once a vehicle is put on the road, it has got to

pay the tax for that quarter. But if the vehicle does not use the road subsequently, then under the rules a refund will be granted if the authorities are

satisfied that this vehicle did not use the road subsequently. Except this concession, the mere fact of substitution of one vehicle by another does not

exonerate the first vehicle from payment of tax.

4.

For the vehicle M. D. J. 832, the owner is bound to pay the tax. Inasmuch as he has not paid the tax, he is guilty of the offence and the acquittal

is therefore reversed and he is convicted and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 25. He is further directed to pay the tax of Rs. 427 for the quarter. He will

be at liberty to apply for refund by satisfying the authorities that this vehicle did not run after, the first month in that quarter. The appeal is allowed.