Sekkappan vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sekkappan, filed a writ petition seeking a Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent (State Tax Officer, GST) to issue a valid GST ID and password for Kannappan Enterprises to submit monthly GST returns. The 4th respondent, S. Kannappan, alleged that the petitioner was interfering with his business by writing to Reliance Industries to stop supplies. The 4th respondent also stated he was diligently paying amounts as per an interim order dated 28.02.2022. The petitioner countered that the allegations were untrue and that the writ petition was a result of an internal dispute between the petitioner and his son (the 4th respondent), which should be resolved in a civil court.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition was not the appropriate forum for adjudicating the dispute. It observed that the matter involved an internecine dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent, which was essentially a private dispute. The Court concluded that such disputes could not be decided in summary proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. Therefore, the writ petition was closed with liberty to the parties to pursue their remedies before the civil court. The Court also directed the 4th respondent to continue paying Rs. 15,000/- per month to the petitioner pending final determination of individual rights in the civil proceedings. No costs were awarded.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is the appropriate forum to adjudicate a dispute concerning the issuance of GST ID and password when the underlying issue appears to be a private civil dispute between family members regarding business operations and financial arrangements? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought a direction for the issuance of GST credentials to enable the submission of returns, implying a procedural necessity. Revenue/State's Argument: The revenue/state authorities were not recorded as making specific arguments on the merits of the GST ID issuance. 4th Respondent's Argument: The 4th respondent contended that the writ petition was being used to stifle his business due to an internecine dispute with the petitioner and that the matter should be resolved in a civil court. He also stated compliance with the interim order for monthly payments.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
This writ petition has been filed for a Mandamus to direct the 3rd respondent to issue a valid GST ID and password to submit monthly GST returns (Reg.No.33AARFK6349) for Kannappan Enterprises, No.137, Reliance Petrol Pump, Kamarajar Salai, Madurai, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 15.02.2022. 2.The learned counsel for the 4th respondent submits that the petitioner is putting a spoke into the business by writing letter directly to the Reliance Industries, Chennai to not to supply any Gas, LPG, Diesel and Petrol for the retail outlet and thereby affecting to indirectly stifle the business of the 4th respondent. It 1/2 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ is further submitted that the 4th respondent is regularly paying the amounts as ordered by this Court by its interim order dated 28.02.2022 diligently. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner on the other hand submits that there is no truth in the allegation. The character and complexion of this writ petition is changing day by day on account of internecine dispute between the petitioner and his son, namely the 4th respondent. These matters cannot be adjudicated and decided in a summary proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is a private dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent. They have to resolve their dispute only before the civil Court in accordance with law. 4.Under these circumstances, this writ petition stands closed with liberty to the parties to workout their remedy before the civil Court. The 4th respondent is directed to continue to pay the monthly amount of Rs.15,000/- to the petitioner where there shall be a final determination of the individual rights between the petitioner, the 4th respondent and his mother in such proceedings. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Assistant Registrar (AE) //// / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) mm To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai District, Madurai. 2.The Joint Commissioner, Office of the Commercial Tax, Madurai. 3.The State Tax Officer, Goods and Services Tax (GST), Munichalai Road, Madurai 625 020. +1 CC to M/s.T. CIBI CHAKRABORTHY, Advocate ( SR-19074[F] dated 18/04/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.M. JEGADEESHPANDIAN, Advocate ( SR-19235[F] dated 19/04/2022 )
2022 RK(02/05/2022) 2P 6C 2/2 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.