Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE31T DAYOF OCTOBER20149TH KARTHIKA, 1936 WP(C).No. 13516 of 2014 (L) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- VALSALAKUMARI, JOTHIR BHAVAN, KUNNIKKODE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY DR.K.P.SATHEESAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE. ADVS.SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD, SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM), SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR, SRI.S.VIBHEESHANAN. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, KOLLAM - 691 001.
3. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, CHATHANNOOR, KOLLAM- 691 572. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.SANJEETHA K.A. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON3110-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. WP(C).No. 13516 of 2014 (L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE R.C.BOOK OF VEHICLE NO.KL-25/A1309 EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RATION CARD SHOWING THAT THE PETITIONER'S FAMILY IS BELOW POVERTY LINE. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
DATED0103-2010 IN WP(C).NO. 6333/2010. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. Q.7.893/2010 DATED2603-2010 GIVEN BY THE2D RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED0604-2010 BEFORE THE2D RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
DATED2605-2010 IN WP(C).NO. 13550/2010. EXT.P7 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.Q7-839/10 DATED2503-2011 ISSUED BY THE2D RESPONDENT. EXT.P8 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.22/APL/2011/AC(X) DATED1609-2011 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL EXCISE COMMISSIONER. EXT.P9 - TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED1710-2011. EXT.P10 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE2D RESPONDENT DATED1402-2014. EXT.P11 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE GIVEN BY THE3D RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED2103-2014. EXT.P12 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.Q7(V)-893/10 DATED0805-2014 ISSUED BY THE2D RESPONDENT. EXT.P13- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.Q7(V)893/2010 DATED1208/2014 ISSUED BY THE2D RESPONDENT. EXT.P14- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.DP3-1193/09 DATED1203/2013 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, PATHANAMTHITTA. .......2/- WP(C).No. 13516 of 2014 (L) RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.R1A COPY OF THE SAID ORDER
NO.XA4-24994/2011 DATED1304/2012. EXT.R1B COPY OF THE ORDER
OF THE APEX COURT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
............................................................... W.P.(C).No.13516 of 2014 ................................................................ Dated this the 31st day of October, 2014
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the confiscation of a vehicle belonging to him in connection with an allegation that it was involved in an offence under the Abkari Act. The facts would disclose that when the vehicle was initially seized, the petitioner had approached the respondents to release the vehicle pending adjudication. When the respondents refused to release the vehicle, he approached this Court and, pursuant to the directions from this Court, obtained the release of the vehicle by furnishing security in the form of deposit of title deeds of immovable property belonging to him. Thereafter, the proceedings under the Abkari Act continued and culminated in an order of confiscation of the vehicle. Against the said order, the petitioner filed a revision petition under the Abkari Act. In the meanwhile, however, the respondents re-possessed the vehicle and, by Ext.P12 notice issued to the petitioner, insisted on payment of an amount of Rs.3,69,322/- as a condition for the release of the vehicle pending disposal of the revision petition. The petitioner, therefore, approached this Court through the present writ petition seeking to quash Ext.P12 notice. By an interim order dated 17.06.2014, the petitioner was permitted to obtain release of the vehicle on payment of an amount of Rs.3,10,000/- which was the market value of the W.P.(C).No.13516 of 2014 -2- vehicle. It is pointed out that the said amount has since been paid by the petitioner. The petitioner now limits his prayer to a direction to return the title deeds that were initially deposited with the respondents as a condition for obtaining release of the vehicle on the earlier occasion.
2. I have heard Dr.K.P.Satheesan, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I am of the view that in so far as the petitioner now seeks to limit his prayer to a return of the title deeds, while leaving it open to him to pursue his remedies under the Act against the confiscation order, the writ petition can be disposed with a direction to the 2nd respondent to release the title deeds pertaining to the immovable property belonging to the petitioner, that was offered to him by way of security for release of the vehicle belonging to the petitioner, forthwith. It is made clear that I have not pronounced on the liability of the petitioner to pay interest as demanded by the respondents in Ext.P12 notice. Considering the submission of the learned Government Pleader that the revision application preferred W.P.(C).No.13516 of 2014 -3- by the petitioner, against the order of confiscation, has since been disposed by the 2nd respondent vide Ext.R1(a) order that is produced, along with the counter affidavit, I make it clear that, in the event of the confiscation order passed by the 2nd respondent being sustained against the petitioner in proceedings under the Abkari Act and Rules, it shall be open to the respondents to recover the interest amount due from the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed as above. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns W.P.(C).No.13516 of 2014 -4-