JAGIR SINGH & ORS. ETC. ETC. v. STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. ETC. ETC.
Citation: [1976] 2 S.C.R. 809; 1975 INSC 292
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: A.N. RAY , KUTTYIL KURIEN MATHEW, N.L. UNTWALIA
Judgment date:
Case summary
1975 INSC 292. Supreme Court of India judgment dated 1975-11-26. JAGIR SINGH & ORS. ETC. ETC. v. STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. ETC. ETC. Read the judgment and case...
Judgment text
S LO_ SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1976) 2 S. C. R. JAGIR SINGH & ORS. ETC. ETC. v. STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. ETC. ETC. November 26, 1975 (A. N. RAY, C. J. , K. K. MATHEW AND N. L. UNTWALIA, JJ. ] Biluir Taxation on Passengers and Goods (Carried by Public Service Motor Vehicles) Act, 1961--Sec. 3-'0wner'-lf includes any person for the time being in charge of the Vehicle-Liability to pay tax-On )>'hom rests. Section 2(d) of the Bihar Taxation on Passengers and Goods (carried by Public Service Motor Vehicles) Act, 1961, defines "owner" as the owner of a public service motor vehicle and includes the holder of a permit under the Motor Vehicles,,. Act, 1939, in respect of a public _service motor yehicle or l)ny person for the time being jn . charge of such vehicle or re~pCl! lsible for the management of the 1a-c:e of' business of such: owner. Sect10n 3(2) of the Act pro- 11 vides that every owner shall pay to the State Government the amonnt of tax due under s. 3.
Sub-section 3 provides that every passenger carried by a public service motor vehicle and every person whose goods are carried. by such vehicle shall be liable to pay to the owner the amount of tax payable under s. 3 and every owner would recover such tax from such owner or person as the case may be. There are identical provisiom in the different State Acts. The term ~'operator'' used in some Acts, instead of the wo1~d "owner'', means n_ny per~on whose name is entered in the permit as the permit-holder or any person hav\11g the possession or contro1 of such vehicle. In a petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution it was contended that the words "or any person for the time being in charge of such vehicle" in the definition of "owner" mean that if there are two types of owners for a particular vehicle, it will be the owner who transports the goods carried by the vehicle wl:Jo is responsible to pay the tax.
Dismissing the petition, HELD : The liability to pay tax is of the permit-holder in all cases. The permit-holder is the owner within the definition of the word "owner" in the Bihar and other State Acts and is also the "operator'' within the meaning of the word "operator" in other Acts. [817G-H] (1) The definition of the term "owner" is exhaustive and intended to extend_ the m_eaning of the term by including within its sweep bailee of a public earner vehicle or any manager acting on behalf of the owner. The intention of the Legislature to extend the meaning of the term by the definition given by it will be frustrated if what is intended to be inclusive is interpreted to- exclude the actual owner. [815H] (2) Th~ words "or any person for the time being in charge of such vehicle .? r _regmnsible for the management o.
f the place of business of such, owner" mdicate that the permit-holder will include any person who is in charge of such vehicle or any person who is tesponsible for the management of the place of busmess of such_ owner. The owner cannot escape the liability by stating that any person i's for fhe time being in charge of such vehicle and therefore such person is the, owner and not the permit-holder. [815E] ' · (3) (a) Once 'it isl found that the Legislature levies tax on passengers and goods carried by public service motor vehicles, it becomes the responsibility of the owner of the vehicle not to permit the vehicle to be used until the tax is paid. [8160] . (b) The operational arrangement has no relevance to the liability to taxa- .! ion. The person who a! lows his vehicle to be used for the purpose' of carry-mg goods or passengers i~ the permit-hold cr of vehicle and its authorised load and the rate and amount of the commission. These agents are con.
fined to the special work of collecting, forwarding, distributing of goods carried by public service vehicles. · The Bihar Act prescribes Rules made under the Bihar Act. The Bihar Act and Rules thereunder define 'agent' t'O. mean a person authorised in writing by owner to appear on his behalf before a prescribed authority. An agent under the Bihar Act is only one authorised by the owner to appear before a prescribed authority for different pur-poses mentioned in the Rules. The Bihar Act and the Rules do not recognise any agency in the matter of tax on fares and freights payable to the owner of the public service vehicle. The agents under public Carrier Rules are licensed to do the special task of collecting, forwarding and distributing goods carried by public carriers. They charge fees fo1: such service and they have special responsibility and liability under terms of agency. These agents are not owners of public service vehicles.
The fact that these licensed agents have to furnish the operators with correct figures of freight receivable by them shows not only that they are accountable to the owners or operators but also that licensed E agents arc not the owners or operators. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 in sections 514, 55 and 56 deal with applications for public carrier's permit, procedure in considering appli-cation for public carriers. permit and grant of public carrier's permit. Section 59 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 states that save as provided in section 61, a permit shall not be transferable from one person to F-another e. xcept with the permission of the trans~ort authority which granted the permit and shall not without such permission operate to confur on any person to whom a vehicle covered by the permit is, transferred any right to use that vehicle in the manner authorised by the permit. Section 61 speaks of transfer of permit on the death of the holder.
Therefore, these provisions in the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 indicate that a permit cannot be transferred. ' The permit holder is the owner within the definition of the "owner" in the Bihar Act and other Acts and is also the "operator" within the meaning of the word "operator" in other Acts to which reference has been made. The liability to pay tax is of the permit holder in all cases. For these reasons. the contentions of the petitioners fail. The Hr petitions are dismissed: Parties will pay and bear their own costs. P. B. R. I Petitions dfamissed.
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.