SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(Kar) 3

Karnataka High Court
Kothari and Co - Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka - Respondent
Decided On : 01-02-85
C.R.P. : 783 of 1980

Advocates:
J.S.GUNJAL, Sona G.Vakkund

Headnote:

Forest Act - Confiscation of Lorry - S. 71-A, S. 71-D - The court discussed the interpretation of the words 'district Judge' in S. 71d of the Forest Act and concluded that it did not connote an authority persona designata. The revisions were allowed, and the order of confiscation passed by the D. F. O. and the District Judge were set aside.

Fact of the Case:

The lorry in question was found carrying sandalwood billets, leading to its confiscation. The registered owner and the alleged legal owners filed appeals against the order of confiscation, which were dismissed by the District Judge. The revisions were filed against this order.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the use of the words 'district Judge' in S. 71d of the Forest Act did not connote an authority persona designata, allowing for the revisions to be considered under S. 115 C. P. C.

Issues: The main issue was the maintainability of the revisions under S. 115 C. P. C. against the order of confiscation passed by the D. F. O. and confirmed by the District Judge.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the words 'district Judge' in S. 71d of the Forest Act, concluding that it did not connote an authority persona designata, thus allowing for the revisions to be considered under S. 115 C. P. C.

Final Decision: The revisions were allowed, and the order of confiscation passed by the D. F. O. and the District Judge were set aside. The Government Pleader was permitted to file her memo of appearance within 15 days from the date of the judgment.

P. A. KULKARNI, J.

( 1 ) C. R. P. 783/80 by M/s Kothari and Co. , is directed against the order dated 5. 1. 1980 passed by the District Judge, Mysore, in misc. Appeal No. 27/80 affirming the order dated 11. 1. 78, passed by the Divisional forest Officer, Kollegal, ordering the confiscation of the lorry in question. C. R. P. 1216/80 by respondent No. 3- rahim is directed against the same order confiscating the lorry in question.

( 2 ) ON receipt of information that sandal wood was being smuggled from Minimum side, the Range Forest Officer, Rampuram and the Range Forest Officer, of the mobiule Squad, Kollegal went to Dinnalli road on the night of 26. 8. 77 and kept a watch. After midnight, in the early hours of 27. 8. 77, they found a lorry bearing No. MYN 5565 parked near the house of one pakiranaika in Gollaradibba village. On suspicion they checked the said lorry and found in the said lorry 133 billets of sandalwood and a bundle of small sandalwood pieces in all worth Rs. 75,000/ -. They were covered with tarpaulin over which farm manure had been piled up. One Mohammed Peer Saheb and one Shiva the cleaner of the lorry were found in the said lorry. Two number plates bearing registration no. MYM 5421 were found in the cabin. Even on the body of the said lorry the number of the said lorry had been painted as MYM 5421 and the name of the owner had been painted as S. A. Rahim. On enquiry with persons who were found in the lorry, it was learnt that the said san- dalwood billets were supplied by one Papa sab and Mohammed Sulthan from the forest near Minniam and that because the lorry had a break-down, Damodhara-the driver of the lorry had parked the said lorry at the said place and had gone to mysore to bring spare parts for the said lorry. The Range Forest Officer (hereinafter referred to as the 'rfo') seized the said lorry and the sandalwood under a mahazar Ex. B and produced the said persons, who were present in the said lorry, with a report Ex. A. before the station house Officer, Ramapuram police Station. The lorry and the sandal wood seized were produced before the Divisional Forest officer as per S. 71-A of the Forest Act.

( 3 ) THE D. F. O. , Kollegal, made a reference to the Regional Transport Officer, mandya, and came to know that no lorry bearing registration No. MYN 5565 had been registered in the office of the R. T. O. at Mandya. The R. T. O. Mysore, however, informed that the lorry bearing registration number MYM 5421 had been registered with him and that Sri. S. A. Rahim was the registered owner of the said lorry. The d. F. O. thereupon issued show cause notices to the accused concerned in this case, as well as to the registered owner of the said lorry. A notification was also published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 29. 12. 77 calling for objection to the confiscation of the said lorry as required under the provisions of the KARNATAKA FOREST ACT, 1963.

( 4 ) THE registered owner of the lorry bearing No. MYM 5421 contended before the Enquiry Officer that he was the registered owner of the lorry and that the alleged offence had taken place without his knowledge and he prayed for the release of the vehicle.

( 5 ) ON 22. 12. 77 M/s. Kothari and Co. , filed an application before the Enquiry Officer alleging that they are the real owners of the said lorry as per the Hire Purchase agreement and they had no knowledge about the sandal wood billets being carried in the said lorry. They produced the hire purchase agreement. He recorded the statements of the registered owner S. A. Rahim and Mohammad Peer Sab, one of the persons found in the lorry at the time of seizure, and passed an order confiscating the lorry in question.

( 6 ) THE registered owner Rahim being aggrieved by the said order of confiscation approached the District Judge with Misc. Appeal No. 21/78. M/s. Kothari and Co. , who claimed to be the legal owners as per the Hire Purchase Agreement were also aggrieved by the said order and approached the District Judge wit


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top