2016 (11) TMI 895

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lants are the plaintiffs and the respondent is the defendant before the Trial Court. The plaintiffs filed the suit in O.S.No.106 of 2007 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai seeking the relief of declaration that the notice dated 09.03.2007 issued by the defendant/respondent herein, in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.A3/1556/99 is void and also for a consequential relief of injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit properties. The plaintiffs' case is that the suit properties were joint family properties, which originally belonged to the children of one V.O.S.Syed Mohammed, namely, (1)Mohammed Sultan, (2)Mohammed Ibrahim, (3)Jai Nambu Kani an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and dismissed the appeal. Challenging the same, the present second appeal is filed by the appellants, raising the following substantial questions of law: (1) Whether the non-exercise of jurisdiction by the Courts below is correct when admittedly the proceedings initiated by the respondent is ab-initio void? (2) Whether the provisions of Sections 50 and 51 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act would apply to the facts and circumstances of the case? (3) Whether the ratio of judgments reported in 1997 (5) SCC 536 (Mafatlal Industrial Limited vs. Union of India) are not applicable to the facts of the present case? 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Courts below erred in refusing to exercise its jurisdiction and t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... il Courts ought not to have refused to exercise its jurisdiction. It is further submitted that the Courts below had erred in dismissing the suit on the ground that the suit is hit by Sections 50 and 51 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. It is further submitted that no assessment order was passed so far and only recovery proceedings was issued and that too, after the demise of the dealer, V.O.S.Syed Mohammed. Stating so, the learned counsel for the appellants, submitted that this Second Appeal has to be allowed by setting aside the judgments and decree of the Courts below. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and perused the materials available on record, carefully and meticulously. 6. As rightly contended by the learned c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X