State of Kerala &
Ors. Vs. T.John Rose & Ors. Etc.  INSC 1974 (18 November 2008)
JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.6700-6701 OF 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C)
Nos.24325-24326/2007) State of Kerala & Ors. ...Appellant(s) Versus T. John
Rose & Ors. Etc. ...Respondent(s) ORDER Leave granted.
In this matter, vide
Order dated 5th January, 2007, Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax Office,
rejected the application for registration submitted by respondent No.1 herein
in terms of the following order:
submitted by Sri T. John Rose referred as 2nd above is hereby rejected.
Consequent to the rejection of the application the eleven cheques submitted
before me along with letters are also returned herewith."
According to the
Assistant Commissioner, the first respondent herein did not fulfil the
definition of the word "Promoter", as defined in Section 2(l) of the
Kerala Tax on Paper Lotteries Act, 2005. The Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax
Office, took the view that the first respondent (applicant) is not a person
directly authorized by the State of Arunachal Pradesh to sell their lottery
tickets in the ...2/- -2- State of Kerala. The said authority scrutinized the
agreement dated 17th June, 2006 between Government of Arunachal Pradesh and
Arunachal Pradesh Relief and Welfare (Charitable) Society as well as the
agreement dated 19th June, 2006 between the said Society and M/s. Sri Krishna
Agency and a further agreement dated 15th December, 2006 between M/s. Sri
Krishna Agency and the first respondent and came to the conclusion that
respondent No.1 was not the person directly authorized by the State of
Arunachal Pradesh to sell their lottery tickets in the State of Kerala.
In the course of the
hearing, we enquired from the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State
of Arunachal Pradesh whether that State was prepared to directly appoint
respondent No.1 as a Promoter within the meaning of Section 2(l) of the 2005
Act. Today, when the matter reached final hearing, a letter from the State of
Arunachal Pradesh, dated 12th November, 2008, is submitted to us. It is
addressed to the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. It indicates direct
authorization of respondent No.1 as a Promoter in terms of Section 2(l) of the
In view of the said
letter, we are satisfied that there is a direct authorization by the State of
Arunachal Pradesh in favour of the first respondent. The said letter is ordered
to be taken on record. The only discrepancy appears to be that ...3/- -3- the
letter should be addressed to the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
and not to the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. We direct the Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes to forward the letter dated 12th November, 2008 to the competent
authority, who is directed to register respondent No.1 as a Promoter subject to
respondent No.1 fulfilling all other terms and conditions as required by law.
Civil Appeals are, accordingly, disposed of with no order as to costs.
(B. SUDERSHAN REDDY)
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.5
SECTION III SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for
Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).24325-24326/2007 (From the judgement and order
dated 11/04/2007 in WA No.631/2007 &
WA No. 638/2007 of
the HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM) STATE OF KERALA & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS T.JOHN ROSE & ORS.ETC. Respondent(s) (With prayer for interim
relief) (FOR FINAL DISPOSAL) (FOR ORDERS) Date: 18/11/2008 These Petitions were
called on for hearing today.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
S.H. KAPADIA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. SUDERSHAN REDDY For Petitioner(s) Mr.
T.L.V. Iyer, Sr.Adv.
Mr. R. Sathish,Adv.
No.2: Mr. P.S. Raman, Sr.Adv.
Mr. Bharat Sangal,
Ms. Mrinalini Oinam,
No.1: Mr. Siddhartha
No.3: Mr. K. Radha
Ms. Sunita Sharma,
Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv.
Ms. Sushma Suri, Adv.
UPON hearing counsel
the Court made the following ORDER Leave granted.
Civil Appeal are
disposed of with no order as to costs, in terms of the signed order.
Pages: 1 2