Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1968 (12) TMI 92

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t was somewhat faintly suggested that the Union of India had no interest in maintaining an application for removal of attachment. But the Union of India was a trustee for the subscriber of the money. When the amount lying with the Reserve Bank as the agent of the Railway Administration was attached the Union had clearly an interest to maintain the application for removal of attachment. The order of attachment of the amount into which the two cheques drawn by the Railway Administration were converted on encashment was contrary to the terms of S. 3 of the Provident Funds Act, 1925. Appeal allowed. - C.A. 105 OF 1966 - - - Dated:- 6-12-1968 - J.C. SHAH, V. RAMASWAMI AND A.N. GROVER, JJ JUDGMENT The Judgment of the Court was delive .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The respondent Radha Kissen Agarwalla had obtained a money decree against Browne and he applied to the 3rd Court of the Subordinate Judge at Alipore for execution of that decree, and obtained an order for attachment of the cheques lying with the Reserve Bank. The cheques were attached and under orders of the executing court the cheques were encashed and the amount realized was deposited in the executing court. The Union of India claimed immunity from attachment of the cheques on the ground that they represented provident fund money which by s. 3 of the Provident Funds Act, 1925, was immune from attachment. The execution application filed by Radha Kissen Agarwalla was struck off on December 7, 1956. On the next day Radha Kissen Agarwal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... payment is required." Accounts Officer for payment of the amount standing to his credit in a Provident Fund Account in sterling if the country in which it is to be paid, the rupee is not legal tender. Browne had given intimation before he retired of his intention to receive the provident fund amount due to him at the foot of the Provident Fund Account in sterling in the United Kingdom. After retirement of Browne, in order to carry out that obligation, the Accounts Officer of the Railway made out two cheques in the name of Browne and sent them to the Reserve Bank for conversion of the amount in sterling. The Reserve Bank was the only authority which could permit such conversion in view of the 31 currency restrictions imposed by the Governmen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... wne to receive the amount on his behalf. So long as the money remained under the control of the Railway Administration as provident fund money, it was exempt from attachment. Clause (b) of r. 1413 (1), which we have already noted, imposed upon the Accounts Officer an obligation to send the amount through a bank for payment at the place at which Payment was required, and the payment was required either under the first intimation at Liverpool by bank draft or under the later intimation by payment to the bankers of 'Browne at Birmingham. The High Court relied upon illustration (d) to s. 50 of the Indian-Contract Act in support of the view that by sending the two cheques to the Reserve Bank of India in performance of the manner of Payment pre .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Reserve Bank of India had ceased to be provident fund money and was liable to be attached. It was somewhat faintly suggested that the Union of India had no interest in maintaining an application for removal of attachment. But the Union of India was a trustee for the subscriber of the money. When the amount lying with the Reserve Bank as the agent of the Railway Administration was attached the Union had clearly an interest to maintain the application for removal of attachment. The order of attachment of the amount into which the two cheques drawn by the Railway Administration were converted on encashment was contrary to the terms of S. 3 of the Provident Funds Act, 1925. The appeal is therefore allowed and the order passed by the High .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates