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

2023 Supreme(Pat) 356

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, MADHURESH PRASAD
Rina Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad.
For the Respondents: Mr. Kumar Manish (SC-5).

K. Vinod Chandran, CJ.—The petitioner is aggrieved with the confiscation proceedings taken as Excise Confiscation Case No. 2/2016 by the 4th respondent against a vacant land in Khata No. 23, Plot No. 1666 and Rakba- 0.16 decimals situated on a four lane under the Circle Officer, Sasaram, Rohtas, belonging to the father of the petitioner. The petitioner contends that the property was illegally proceeded with on allegation of recovery of liquor from a room in a hotel and the vehicles parked in the premises, pursuant to which an FIR was registered, which is produced as Annexure-1. It is the contention of the petitioner that the father of the petitioner had entered into an agreement of lease with the person who was running the hotel for a period of nine years, which agreement dated 29.07.2009 is marked as Annexure-2. The father of the petitioner died eight years back and the lease expired in the year 2018. The petitioner has filed the application since he is the legal heir entitled to have possession and ownership of the property.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that there is nothing recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and the premises wa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top