Allowed

Venkatesan v. The District Revenue Officer

Madras HC26 Aug 2019WP/24566/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court issued a Writ of Mandamus directing the release of a seized Mahindra tractor belonging to the petitioner in Thiruvallur District. The order imposed five conditions, including a non-refundable deposit, an ex-gratia bond, and an undertaking not to use the vehicle for illegal activities.

What did the court decide?

Release of the seized tractor subject to deposit of Rs.25,000, execution of bond for Rs.10,000 with two sureties, and undertaking not to misuse or alienate the vehicle.

Venkatesan Vs The District Revenue Officer — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 26.08.2019

¶3

Coram

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.SUBBIAH and The Hon'ble Mr.Justice C.SARAVANAN

¶5

Writ Petition No.24566 of 2019

¶6

Venkatesan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
2.The Tahsildar,
Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
E-5, Sholavaram Police Station,
Thiruvallur District. ... Respondents

¶7

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the petitioner's Mahindra & Mahindra Tractor, bearing Registration No.TN-18-AU-2164 seized by the respondents on 20.07.2019.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Chandrasekar For Respondents: Mr.V.Shanmuga Sundar Special Government Pleader

¶9

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the petitioner's Mahindra & Mahindra Tractor, bearing Registration No.TN-18-AU-2164 seized by the respondents on 20.07.2019.

¶10

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶12

According to the petitioner, the third respondent has seized the vehicle in question on 20.07.2019 on the ground of illegal carrying of sand, and till date, no order for release of the said vehicle had been passed by the respondents. Hence, he has come forward with the present Writ Petition.

¶13

On the other hand, it is submitted by learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents that the vehicle in question was used for illegal transportation of mines and minerals like sand and hence, the vehicle was seized. He further submitted that the petitioner has no previous case.

¶14

In any event, as the vehicle is under the custody of the third respondent from the date of seizure and considering the fact that if the same is allowed to be kept idle by exposing the same to rain and sun, it would certainly diminish their value, this Court is of the view that the vehicle in question may be released by imposing certain conditions on the petitioner.

¶15

Accordingly, the respondents are directed to release the vehicle in question to the petitioner within a period of 7 days from the date of compliance of the condition Nos.(i) to (iii), which are mentioned below:

¶16

(i)The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) before the jurisdictional Tahsildar concerned as non-refundable deposit. After receipt of the above said amount, the same will have to be deposited by the jurisdictional Tahsildar concerned, to the credit of the District Mines and Minerals Foundation Trust as non-refundable deposit.

¶17

(ii)The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate.

¶18

(iii)The petitioner shall give an undertaking before the respondents /authority concerned stating that he will not use the vehicle in question for any illegal activities in future and shall produce the same as and when required by the respondents and also the trial Court, failing which the respondents/trial Court is/are at liberty to confiscate the vehicle.

¶19

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

¶20

(v)The petitioner is also directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents.

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶23

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
arb
To
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
2.The Tahsildar,
Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
E-5, Sholavaram Police Station,
Thiruvallur District.
+1cc to Mr.P.Chandrasekar, Advocate SR.No.72841
+1cc to Government Pleader SR.No.74066
Writ Petition No.24566 of 2019
GJ II(CO)
GMY(16/09/2019)

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Venkatesan v. The District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkatesan v. The District Revenue 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

K.Govindan Vs v. Bhavanandhi

S.Benjamin Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

M.Seenivasan Vs The Assistant Director

R.Vijayan Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Praveen Raj Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Dhanapal, Vs The District Revenue Officer