ANTONY DOMINIC
Shaiju – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Excise Commissioner – Respondent
Petitioner is the registered owner of a Hero Honda motor cycle bearing Regn. No. KL-7 AP 9646, which was seized from him following his involvement in CR NO.5/05 registered under the Abkari Act on the allegation that the vehicle was used for the transportation of illicit arrack. The motor cycle was eventually ordered to be confiscated by the 1st respondent as per his order dated 22/3/2007. Petitioner thereafter filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent and by Ext.P1 order dated 29/5/07, the appeal was rejected, but it was ordered that the vehicle be released to the petitioner on his paying the market value of the vehicle. It is stated that he could not comply with the condition imposed in Ext.P1 and therefore the vehicle continued in the possession of the respondents.
2. Subsequently, the petitioner was informed by the 1st respondent, by Ext.P2 letter dated 16/10/2007, that if he did not deposit an amount of Rs.22,500/-within 7 days, the vehicle will be sold and that the value will be deposited with the Government. Petitioner submits that in the meantime by Ext.P3, the judgment rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc II) Ernakulam in SC NO.143/07, the petitioner
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.