Disposed

M.Vijay v. The District Revenue officer

Madras HC1 Sept 2021WP/18003/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court directed release of seized vehicle upon deposit of Rs. 25,000 security and proof of ownership. Petitioner prohibited from using vehicle for unlawful purposes. Authority granted three months to pass orders on merits; refund contingent on silence.

What did the court decide?

Release of vehicle upon deposit of Rs. 25,000 and proof of ownership; refund of deposit if no action from authority within three months.

M.Vijay Vs The District Revenue officer — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.09.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

W.P.No.18003 of 2021

M.Vijay

...Petitioner

The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate, Krishnagiri District.

¶10

The Inspector of Police CSCID Police Station, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District. (Crime No.58 of 2021) ...Respondents

¶11

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the petitioner's Mahendra Max Pickup vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-29-AE-3369 forthwith which was seized by the 2^nd respondent in Crime No.58/2021 on 08.06.2021 keeping under the custody of 1st respondent by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 02.08.2021.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jayachandran

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.G.Krishnaraja, Government Counsel

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to release the vehicle viz., Mahendra Max Pickup vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-29-AE3369 seized by the second respondent to the petitioner.

¶16

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

¶17

It is seen from the records that the subject vehicle was seized by the second respondent on 08.06.2021 on the allegation that the said vehicle was indulged in transporting

¶18

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

¶19

rice illegally. Therefore, this Court, at this stage, is not expressing any view on the contentions made by the petitioner against the allegations made, as it is for the Adjudicating Authority to consider and decide. However, considering the fact that the vehicle was seized as early as on 08.06.2021 and the same is kept idle thereby exposing it to sun and rain, which undoubtedly would diminish its value, this Court is of the view that the following order will protect the interest of both parties:

¶20

(a) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty five thousand only) before the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶21

(b) The petitioner shall appear in person and produce all the relevant documents proving the ownership of the vehicle for verification of the authority.

¶22

(c) On receipt of payment as stated supra and also on being satisfied with the ownership of the vehicle, the first respondent shall release the subject vehicle forthwith.

¶23

(d) The petitioner shall not use the said vehicle for any unlawful purpose and also shall not alienate the same during the pendency of the proceedings.

¶24

(e) It is open to the respondent to initiate proceedings in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders on merits, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶25

(f) If no such order is passed within the time stipulated therein, the amount so paid by the petitioner shall be refunded to the petitioner.

¶26

(g) This order for release of the vehicle can be availed of by the petitioner, if the vehicle is not in the custody of criminal Court. If the vehicle is in the custody of the criminal Court, it is open to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate to get release of the vehicle by filing appropriate application and the same can be considered in accordance with law.

¶27

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

¶28

This Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

Assistant Registrar(CS II)

¶31

//True Copy//

¶32

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶33

vum

¶34

¶35

The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate, Krishnagiri,

¶36

Krishnagiri District.

¶37

The Inspector of Police CSCID Police Station, Krishnagiri,

¶38

Krishnagiri District.

¶39

+1cc to Mr.M.Jayachandran, Advocate Sr No.43990 +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr No.44260

¶40

W.P.No.18003 of 2021

¶41

PL (CO) PR (22/09/2021)

¶42

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

M.Vijay v. The District Revenue officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Vijay 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Sakthi Vs Liberty General Insurance Ltd.

D.Vasantha Vs The Dean

C.Ramasamy, Vs The Secretary to Government

K.Jayaraman Vs The district collector

J.Krishnasamy Vs The Chairman

R.Gowri Vs The District collector