Disposed

Sahir C.T. v. the Tahsildar

Kerala HC5 Mar 2007WP(C)/6618/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Writ Petition where the Government Pleader sought instructions, the Court issued an interim order releasing the petitioner's vehicle and load, subject to a security deposit and a future undertaking, while directing adjudication proceedings within four months.

What did the court decide?

An interim order directing the third respondent to release the lorry and load upon receipt of a statutory undertaking and security deposit of Rs.10,000.

Sahir C.T. Vs the Tahsildar — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE MONDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2007 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1928 WP(C).No. 6618 of 2007(K)

¶4

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

-----------SAHIR. C.T., S/O.MOHAMMED, AGED 25 YEARS, CHEERANTHODI HOUSE, KUTHUPARAMB, MAITHRA P.O., ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶7

BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

¶10

THE TAHSILDAR, ERNAD.

¶11

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM.

¶12

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AREACODE POLICE STATION.

¶13

THE KAVANNUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE KAVANNUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KAVANNUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶14

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.

¶15

BY G.P.SMT.T.B.RAMANI

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

TODAY I HAVE PASSED AN INTERIM ORDER WHICH ACCORDING TO ME GRANTS THE PETITIONER ALL THE RELIEFS WHICH ARE POSSIBLE AT PRESENT. IN VIEW OF THE INTERIM ORDER THIS WRIT PETITION WILL STAND DISPOSED OF.

¶19

5.3.2007 SD/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE , JUDGE. /TRUE COPY/

¶20

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶21

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J.

¶22

W.P.(C)NO.6618 of 2007

¶23

Dated this 5^th day of March 2007

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

The learned Government Pleader has not been able to get instructions. However, I am inclined to agree with the counsel for the petitioner who submits that no useful purpose will be served from anybody's point of view by allowing the vehicle and load to remain in the premises of the 3rd respondent. Under these circumstances, there will be an interim order in the following terms:

¶26

The petitioner will file an affidavit before the 1st respondent undertaking to produce the lorry having registration No.KL-3A-9988 in good running condition as and when directed in that regard by the 2^nd respondent or any other competent authority. The petitioner will remit Rs.10,000/- by cash with the 1st respondent. The 3^rd respondent, upon receiving a copy of the affidavit and the original of the cash receipt as directed above, will release the lorry together with load to the petitioner.

¶27

It is made clear that release of the lorry and load as directed above will be subject to the outcome of the adjudication proceedings which would be completed by the 2^nd respondent at his earliest and at any rate within four months of receiving a copy of this judgment.

¶28

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE Judge

¶29

dpk

Sahir C.T. v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahir C.T. v. the Tahsildar

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

Sadasivan Nair Vs the Kse Board

K.P.Asharaf Vs Mannancherry Grama Panchayath & Another

Prabhakaran.M. Vs National Thermal Power Corporation

Helen Jerome Vs T.Balakrishnan

Shibu George Vs State of Kerala

Pathumma Vs the Secretary to Government