IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE 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)

O R D E R

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:

“The application 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 2005 Act.   

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.

                         ...................J.               (S.H. KAPADIA)

                        ...................J.

                                       (B. SUDERSHAN REDDY) New Delhi, November 18, 2008.

ITEM NO.1                 COURT NO.5               SECTION III

           S U P R E M E   C O U R T   O F   I N D I A                          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.

CORAM :         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.

For Respondent(s) No.2: Mr. P.S. Raman, Sr.Adv.

Mr. Bharat Sangal, Adv. Ms. Mrinalini Oinam, Adv.

No.1:                Mr. Siddhartha Chowdhury,Adv.

No.3: Mr. K. Radha Krishnan, Sr.Adv. Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv. Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv.

                    Ms. Sushma Suri, Adv.

          UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following                                O R D E R  

Leave granted.

Civil Appeal are disposed of with no order as to costs, in terms of the

signed order.

         (N. ANNAPURNA)       (MADHU SAXENA)         COURT MASTER     COURT MASTER

(Signed order is placed on the file)