A.S. Nehra, J. - (1.) The defendant-appellant Municipal Corporation of Ludhiana has filed the present appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, on 28th November, 1977.
(2.) The facts of the matter, in dispute, are that the plaintiff-respondent is a truck owner and had got Western Zone Permit for plying his truck. He loaded a consignment of Parle biscuits and Parle toffees for carriage from Bombay to Moga and Ludhiana respectively. After unloading the consignment for Moga on 1st July, 1975, he proceeded to Ludhiana where he was to unload the consignment at Sherpur which is outside the municipal limits. According to the. allegations of the plaintiff-respondent, when he reached Sherpur, the staff of the defendant-appellant took the truck forcibly into their possession and refused to release the same. It was also averred that defendant No. 2 demanded illegal gratification for the release of the truck, but on the refusal of the plaintiff-respondent, the truck was taken into custody and a sum of Rs. 7800/- was demanded as octroi charges including the penalty. The plaintiff-respondent instituted a suit for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant-appellant from confiscating of or interfering in any manner with the plying of the truck. The demand of payment of Rs. 7800/- was stated to be illegal and ultra vires the Municipal Act. The suit was contested by the Municipal Committee (now the Municipal Corporation) and it was pleaded that the truck was found standing with loaded consignment near Manju Cinema within the octroi limits of the Municipal Corporation and, on special checking, the plaintiff-respondent tried to slip away with the consignment in the truck, but the truck was apprehended and was brought to the same place. It was further averred that the plaintiff-respondent could not produce any transit permit for entering Ludhiana City, so it was a clear case of intentional evasion of octroi duty and, therefore, the plaintiff-respondent was liable to pay the penalty at the rate of ten times, besides the octroi duty.
(3.) On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:- 1. Whether the suit is maintainable in the present form? 2. Whether the impugned order of imposing penalty upon the plaintiff is illegal, ultra vires and without jurisdiction? 3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the injunction prayed for? 4. Relief.;