Dismissed

Parakash v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC21 Mar 2019WP/8439/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras directed the release of a seized tipper lorry to the petitioner within seven days of compliance with conditions including a non-refundable deposit, execution of a personal bond, and an undertaking against future illegal usage, to prevent depreciation of the vehicle. The petition was disposed of with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Release of the seized tipper lorry bearing registration TN-48-Q-3331 subject to five specific conditions including deposit and bond within 7 days.

Parakash Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 21.03.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.8439 OF 2019

¶7

K.Parakash ...Petitioner

¶8

Vs.
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Tiruchencode Taluk,
Namakkal District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Paramathi Taluk,
Namakkal District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Velur Police Station,
Namakkal District.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the Tipper Lorry bearing registration No.TN-48-Q-3331, seized by the 3^rd respondents on 17.03.2019, to the petitioner forthwith based on the representation of the petitioner dated 18.03.2019.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.Deepan Uday

¶12

For Respondents: Mr.D.Raghu, Government Advocate

¶13

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the Tipper Lorry bearing registration No.TN-48-Q-3331, seized by the 3^rd respondents on 17.03.2019, based on the representation of the petitioner dated 18.03.2019.

¶14

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

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

¶16

According to the petitioner, the respondents have seized the vehicle in question on 17.03.2019 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.

¶17

On the other hand, it is submitted by learned Government Advocate 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.

¶18

In any event, as the vehicle is under the custody of the respondents 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.

¶19

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:

¶20

(i)The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

With the above observations and directions, this Writ

¶27

Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶28

s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-III)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Tiruchencode Taluk,
Namakkal District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Paramathi Taluk,
Namakkal District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Velur Police Station,
Namakkal District.
+1 CC to Mr.Deepan Uday, Advocate sr 26674.
+1 CC to Govt. Pleader sr 28002
Writ Petition No.8439 of 2019
RSV(CO)
SP(29/03/2019)

¶29

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

Parakash v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parakash 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

M.Janarthanan Vs The District Collector

M.Thangarani Vs The Revenue Divisoinal Officer

Sankar Vs The State rep. by its

K.Pandurangan Vs The State rep. by its

Sathish Kumar Vs The State rep. by its