Dismissed

Sevathiveeran v. The Assistant Director

Madras HC6 Jan 2021WP(MD)/87/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ directing release of seized vehicle. Court issued interim direction for respondents to produce vehicle before lower court within ten days to decide on merits, without determining the actual merits. Petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to produce the seized vehicle before the Court below immediately without delay for decision on merits within ten days.

Sevathiveeran Vs The Assistant Director — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.87 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 06.01.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.87 of 2021

¶7

Sevathiveeran ... Petitioner

¶8

-Vs-

¶9

1.The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals Department, Madurai District.

¶10

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Usilampatti, Madurai District.

¶11

3.The Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Town Police Station, Madurai District. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the Tractor bearing Registration No.TN-57-W-5163 along with Trailer bearing Registration No.TN-65-E-6162 seized in connection with Crime No.182 of 2020 on the file of the third respondent police on 18.03.2020.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Palanisamy

¶14

For Respondents : Ms.M.Rajeswari, Government Advocate.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶17

2.The petitioner is having two previous case of the same nature. Therefore, the respondents are directed to produce the petition mentioned vehicle before the Court below immediately and without any delay. It is open to the petitioner to move the Court below for release of the vehicle. As and when the petition is filed by the petitioner, the same will be disposed of on merits and in accordance with law within a period of ten days thereafter. I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the matter.

¶18

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

¶19

1/2

¶20

W.P.(MD)No.87 of 2021

¶21

3.With this direction to the respondents and with the aforesaid liberty to the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶22

Sd/Assistant Registrar (Crl.Side)

¶23

// True Copy //

¶24

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶25

Rmi

¶26

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶27

¶28

1.The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals Department, Madurai District. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Usilampatti, Madurai District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Town Police Station, Madurai District. +1 CC to M/s.GP ( SR-441[F] dated 07/01/2021 ) W.P.(MD)No.87 of 2021 06.01.2021 (KUN)CO AP(20/01/2021) 2 P 5C

¶29

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

¶30

2/2

Sevathiveeran v. The Assistant Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sevathiveeran v. The Assistant Director

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

Sivamurugan.S Vs The Registrar of Societies ( Administration )

Tmt.R.Santhi, Vs the Deputy Registrar of

Chandrabose Vs The Inspector of Police

Rajendran Vs The Assistant Director of Geology and Mining

Alagar Vs The Assistant Director of Geology and Mining

Pandidurai Vs The Assistant Director of Geology and Mining