JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P4 notice issued to him detaining a consignment of Diesel Generating Set and accessories that was being transported at the instance of the petitioner. In the writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the insistence of the respondent that the petitioner must pay the security deposit demanded in the detention notice as a condition for release of the goods and vehicle.

2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:

(i) On a perusal of Ext.P4 notice, it is seen that the objection of the respondent is essentially that the goods were covered by an invoice that was issued in Form No.8B, whereas according to the respondents the invoice should have been in Form No.8. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had sold the item to M/s. Souparnika Projects and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., for delivery at Trivandrum and the item supplied was for the end use of the said Souparnika Pro