Allowed

M.Felix, v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC27 Apr 2018WP(MD)/8299/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order granting interim relief in a writ petition. The Madurai Bench directed the release of a seized Tempo vehicle subject to proof of ownership, security deposit, undertaking against illegal use, and participation in the ongoing enquiry within stipulated timelines.

What did the court decide?

The seized Tempo vehicle to be released within seven days subject to deposit of Rs. 50000, proof of ownership, undertaking against illegal use, and participation in pending enquiry.

M.Felix, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.04.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH W.P.(MD) No.8299 of 2018

¶5

M.Felix ... Petitioner

¶6

vs.

¶7

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Padmanabhapuram, at Kalkulam, Kanyakumari District.

¶8

2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Thuckalay Police Station, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents

¶9

PRAYER : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to release petitioner Tempo bearing Registration No.TN-74-Q-8244 seized on 05.04.2018 by the 2^nd respondent by considering the representation dated 07.04.2018.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.H.Velavadhas For Respondents : Mr.S.Nagarajan Special Government Pleader

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

The petitioner seeks for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to release the petitioner's Tempo bearing Registration No. TN-74-Q-8244 seized on 05.04.2018 by the second respondent.

¶13

2.According to the petitioner, the vehicle, which was used in a private place by his Driver was seized by the second respondent.

¶14

3.On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents that the vehicle was seized as the same was plied without valid permission.

¶15

4.In any event, as the vehicle is under the custody of the respondents having been seized on 05.04.2018 and considering the fact that if the same is allowed to be kept idle by exposing the same to sun and rain, it would certainly diminish its value. Therefore, pending proceedings before the respondents, this Court is of the view that the vehicle can be released by imposing certain conditions on the petitioner for release of the aforesaid vehicle.

¶16

5.Accordingly, the first respondent is directed to release the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ vehicle in question to the petitioner within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order subject to

¶17

¶18

the following conditions:

¶19

“(i) The petitioner shall produce documents before the first respondent under whose custody the vehicle is kept, to establish the ownership of the vehicle in question;

¶20

(ii) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) before the first respondent herein;

¶21

(iii) The petitioner shall give an undertaking that he will not use the vehicle for any illegal activities in future and shall produce the same as and when required by the respondents;

¶22

(iv) On doing so, the vehicle in question shall be returned to the petitioner;

¶23

(v) The petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle in question till the disposal of the proceedings before the authority concerned;

¶24

(vi) The first respondent is directed to complete the enquiry within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; and

¶25

(vii) The petitioner is also directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the first respondent.”

¶26

6.The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs.

¶27

Sd/

¶28

Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶29

/True copy/

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

To:

¶32

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Padmanabhapuram, at Kalkulam,

¶33

Kanyakumari District.

¶34

2.The Sub-Inspector of Police,

¶35

Thuckalay Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

¶36

+1cc to Mr.H.VELAVADHAS, Advocate, SR.No. 64052

¶37

W.P.(MD) No.8299 of 2018 27.04.2018

¶38

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ MM KK/SV MMS/10.05.2018/SAR-1/2P-4C

M.Felix, v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Felix, v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Balakrishnan, Vs the Commissioner(Land Survey)

M.Suresh, S/O.Sundar Raj, Vs the Sub Registrar

S.Josphin Vanitha Rani, Vs the Joint Director of

A.Mahesh Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Ganesan, S/O.Chinnahambi, Vs the Joint Director of

S.Nagar, S/O.Subramania Nadar Vs the Tahsildar