Dama Seshadri Naidu, J.

1. One Mr. Mathew Thomas, the petitioners' vendor, owned an Ambassador Car, which on 04/10/1996 was seized by the authorities from another person, one Mr. Joseph Thomas. The seizure was on the allegation that the vehicle was used for committing an abkari offence. As part of the prosecution, when the authorities seized the vehicle, the owner of the vehicle, Mr. Mathew Thomas, filed an application for interim custody of the vehicle. In fact, on 22/11/1996 the Joint Commissioner of Excise ordered interim custody of the vehicle on the condition of the petitioner executing a personal bond as well as depositing an amount of Rs. 30,000/-. Mr. Mathew Thomas, on fulfilling both the conditions, obtained interim custody of the vehicle. Later, on 10/11/2000, in terms of Section 67B of the Abkari Act, the authorities confiscated the vehicle and directed Mr. Mathew Thomas to surrender it; he has, however, failed to surrender the vehicle.

2. In the wake of the failure of Mr. Mathew Thomas to comply with the directions of the authorities to surrender the vehicle; the said authorities, having forfeited the deposit of Rs. 30,000/-, further initiated revenue recovery p