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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 262

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
K. VIJAYAN – Appellant
Versus
KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (M & M) CORPORATION – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 36689 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.MOHANDAS, SRI.K.SUDHINKUMAR, SRI.SABU PULLAN, SHRI.R.BHASKARA KRISHNAN, SHRI.BHARATH MOHAN, DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.)
For the Respondents: SRI.NAVEEN.T., S.C, KERALA STATE BEV.CO. M AND M., SMT. DEVI SHRI R., GP.

Entitlement to reimbursement for seized liquor due to its improper detention.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to WP

(C) No. 36689 of 2025 concerning a writ petition for the replacement of seized liquor and refund of its value. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing the first respondent to return the amount collected for the seized liquor within six weeks. The issues included the legality of the liquor seizure and the petitioner's entitlement to a refund. The legal reasoning followed previous judgments supporting the petitioner's claims, concluding with a directive to the corporation to act accordingly as noted in Exts. P4, P6, P7, and P8.

Table of Content
1. petition for replacement or refund of seized liquor. (Para 1)
2. judgment references support the petitioner's claims. (Para 2)
3. the court's directive on refund of collected amounts. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:-

“i) to issue a Writ of Mandamus or order or direction to the 1st respondent to replace the liquor kept stored by the 4th respondent in the petitioner’s hotel or to give credit note in respect the value of the liquor detained at the petitioner’s hotel;

ii) to declare that the petitioner is entitled to get the liquor frozen at the petitioner’s hotel replaced by new consumable liquor or to direct the 1st respondent to refund the value of the liquor which was already paid by the petitioner in advance with cost;

iii) to issue such other appropriate Writ, Order or direction as is deemed just and necessary in the circumstances of the case.

iv) It is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents.”

2. The issue raised in this writ petition is covered in favour of the petitioner by Exts.P6 to P8 judgments, namely W.P.

(C). Nos. 2911 of 2023, 11848 of 2025 and W.A. No. 1999 of 2024.

3. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent, the Corporation, to return the amount collected as consideration for the liquor seized, the details of which are mentioned in Ext.P4. This shall be done within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Liberty is also granted to the 1st respondent, the Corporation, to take such measures against the manufacturers or other authorities, if so advised.

The writ petition is allowed as above.

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 Back to top