Disposed

Vijay Tanks and Vessels P.Limited v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Jan 2016WP/1241/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Upon preliminary hearing regarding premature recovery notice issued before exhaustion of appeal rights, the Karnataka High Court disposed of the writ petitions without deciding the merits. Leave to respondents was granted to execute upon filing of appeal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions disposed; recovery notices quashed; liberty granted to respondents to proceed only after appeal period expiry.

Vijay Tanks and Vessels P.Limited Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2016

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION Nos. 1241 AND 1388-1398 OF 2016

¶7

(T-TAR)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

M/s. Vijay Tanks and Vessels P. Limited, S.No.123-1A, MRPL Road, Bala Post and Village, Mangalore Taluk, Dakshina Kannada 575 030. (Represented by its Authorised Signatory Sri. T.Senthamil Selvan, Chief Manager)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(By Shri R. Dakshina Murthy, Advocate & Shri K.S.Naveen Kumar, Advocate)

¶12

AND:

¶13

The State of Karnataka, (represented by its Finance Secretary), Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore 560 001.

¶14

The Deputy Commissioner of

¶15

¶16

Commercial Taxes (Audit-3), DVO Vanijya Therige Bhavana, Maidan Road, Mangalore 575 001.

¶17

State Bank of Sourashtra, (Merged with State Bank of India), Vadodara, Fatehganj, Eagle Apartments, Opposite: Parsiagiari Fatehganj Main Road, Vadodar (60255) 390002, (represented by its Branch Manager).

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(By Shri S.V.Girikumar, Additional Government Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2)

¶20

¶21

These Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the endorsement dated 3.12.2015 in Annexure-K and recovery notice dated 30.12.2015 in Annexure-M as being illegal and untenable in law.

¶22

These Writ Petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day, the court made the following:

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The petitioner is aggrieved by the circumstance that

¶25

though the petitioner has suffered an order against which an

¶26

appeal is provided and there is time to file such an appeal, the

¶27

¶28

second respondent has proceeded to issue a recovery notice to the banker of the petitioner and therefore, in apprehension of recoveries being made prematurely without the petitioner’s right to file an appeal having been exhausted, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶29

The learned Government Advocate submits that no precipitative action would be taken if the petitioner would file an appeal within the period prescribed for filing the appeal.

¶30

Recording the submission of the learned Government

¶31

Advocate, the petitions stand disposed of. If no appeal is filed, it is open for the respondents to execute the order. The learned Government Advocate to file his memo of appearance within two weeks.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

Vijay Tanks and Vessels P.Limited v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Tanks and Vessels P.Limited v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ms Sri Lakshminarayana Swamy Stone Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial

Sri. K. Raghavendra Vs the State of Karnataka

Preusse India Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Karnataka State Financial Corporation

Sri M E Prashanth Vs the Chief Secretary to the Government

Farhathe Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Mysore Asbestos Limited Vs the State of Karnataka