Case Law Details
N. Jayamurugan Vs Adjudicating Authority (Kerala High Court)
Conclusion: Assessee approached the court raising the same contend after failing to get any relief from the Madras High Court which was barred by principles of issue of estoppel and cause of action estoppel. Thus, when there was an alternative and equally efficacious remedy open to a litigant, he should request to pursue that remedy and not invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court.
Held: The Government of Sikkim had appointed M/s. F Private Limited as the distributor to market and sell lottery tickets organized, conducted or promoted by the Government of Sikkim. M/s. M was registered as a promoter under the Kerala Tax on Paper Lotteries Rules, 2005 and they were liable to pay tax on lotteries in the State of Kerala as per Kerala Tax on Paper Lotteries Act. M/s. M was the Kerala stockist of Sikkim lotteries. Assessee entered into a partnership agreement with Mr. Martin and formed a partnership firm by name M/s. M.J. Associates. An agreement was entered into between M/s. M and M/s. M.J. Associates by which M/s. M.J. Associates was appointed as the sole stockist of the lottery tickets in Kerala. M/s. M.J. Associates was only purchasing lottery tickets from M/s. M which was the registered promoter and they in-turn were selling lottery tickets through 73 stockists in Kerala. Some dispute arose between the partners of M/s. M.J. Associates and assessee, thereafter, he had not involved in any sale of Sikkim lotteries in Kerala. From 14.06.2010 to 31.08.2010 the sale of lottery tickets in Kerala was done directly by M/s. M and legal proceedings were initiated by assessee against Mr. Martin, M/s. F and M/s. M. As per the contention, the sales bill raised by the Sikkim government for the period from April 2009 to March 2010 was Rs4,970.42crores whereas only Rs142.93 crores were remitted. Assessee approached the Madras High Court with writ petition challenging provisional attachment of properties by the respondent and the same was dismissed being not maintainable. It was held that it was intriguing to notice that, at first the 1 st accused entered into an agreement with the Sikkim Government; then he himself acted as the distributor and nominated another as stockist; again a partnership was created himself acting as one of the partners. After large sum of money was siphoned off, when proceedings were initiated, challenges were being made in different High Courts. Resultantly, they could successfully stall the proceedings for over six years. Malpractices and fraud had been committed on a massive scale involving huge sum of money. There were reasons to believe that they have acted hand in glove with unknown employees of the Sikkim Government. Even though it was necessary that the lottery should have been printed either in Government press or in presses recognised by Indian Bank Association, all lotteries were printed in some private press in Sivakasi in Tamil Nadu for sale by the 1 st accused Santiago Martin and his aids. It might be true that assessee had been in the field only for three years, the respondents had reasons to believe that he was part of the larger conspiracy at least during the period between 31.12.2007 to 13.06.2010. By that time, the offences under Sections 120B and 420 IPC were incorporated in the schedule of offence. After failing to get any relief from the Madras High Court he had approached this Court raising almost same contentions, which were barred by principles of issue of estoppel and cause of action estoppel. Assessee was not entitled to get any relief from this Court.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking the following reliefs:-
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
