Allowed

Sri. Uppari Subbarayudu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Oct 2020WP/19882/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a vehicle owner challenging the requirement of a fixed deposit for vehicle release. The Court allowed the petition by directing the respondent authorities to release the vehicle upon the petitioner furnishing immovable security worth Rs.2,90,000 and executing a personal bond, aligning with a similar prior order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to release the vehicle on furnishing immovable security worth Rs.2,90,000/- and executing a personal bond, adhering to Stamps and Registration laws.

Sri. Uppari Subbarayudu, Vs The State of Andhra… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶3

WRIT PETITION No.19882 of 2020

¶4

ORDER:

¶5

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 2^nd respondent in insisting for FDR to release of the vehicle Indica Vista Car Vehicle Registration No.AP 21 BB 2668 through the proceedings R.C.No.200/2020, dated 11.09.2020 in favour of the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary and to the petitioner by accepting third party solvencies.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing for respondent Nos.1 & 3 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 2 and 4.

¶7

The Writ Petition is disposed of with the consent of all the parties at the stage of admission, since it is submitted that similar matters of this nature are being disposed of with certain directions for release of the vehicle.

¶8

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in the writ petition is covered by an order, dated 28.09.2020, passed in W.P.No.17427 of 2020. In the said writ petition, the Hon’ble Court was pleased to modify the condition imposed by the excise authorities for release of vehicle. Similar relief is also sought for in the present writ petition challenging the order dated 11.09.2020 wherein the petitioner has been directed

¶9

¶10

to furnish a fixed deposit of Rs.2,90,000/- as a condition precedent for giving interim custody of the petitioner’s vehicle bearing registration No. AP 21 BB 2668 detained in connection with Cr.No.182 of 2020 of Brahmanakotkur Police Station, Kurnool District, pending confiscation proceedings.

¶11

Perused the order passed in W.P.No.17427 of 2020. In view of the order in the said writ petition, and in view of the submission that similar order can as well be passed in the present writ petition, this Court is inclined to dispose of the present writ petition.

¶12

Following the orders passed in W.P.No.17427 of 2020, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2^nd respondent to release the vehicle bearing registration No.AP 21 BB 2668 on furnishing immovable security worth Rs.2,90,000/- and by executing a personal bond in favour of the 2^nd respondent strictly adhering to the Stamps and Registration laws. Further, the immovable property, which is given as security, shall preferably either belong to the petitioner or any of his immediate family members. It is needless to mention that before accepting the same, the authorities shall verify the authenticity of the documents. Apart from that, the petitioner herein shall not alienate, alter or change the nature of the vehicle and shall produce the same as and when required, in default, the respondent authorities are directed to proceed further in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶13

¶14

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition

¶15

shall stand closed.

¶16

_______________________

¶17

JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶18

Date: 22.10.2020 SPR

¶19

¶20

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶21

WRIT PETITION No.19882 of 2020

¶22

Date: 22.10.2020

¶23

SPR

Sri. Uppari Subbarayudu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Uppari Subbarayudu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M. Sudheer, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Somisetti Jagadeeswar Suresh Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Boya Madhava Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Lachi Naga Vennela, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

S.Suresh,the Proprietor, M/S Sri Subramanyam Auto Electrical Works Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kadmi Mani Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh