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

2014 Supreme(Online)(KER) 38891

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J
KARTHIKEYAN – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE – Respondent


JUDGMENT

The petitioner who is the registered owner of a Mahindra Jeep with registration No.KL-08 AH 7378 seeks quashment of Exts.P7 and P9 and also a direction to the first respondent to release the said vehicle without any further delay. The said vehicle was seized on 9.10.2010 from Kothamangalam alleging transportation of 456 liters of 'Arishtam' without any valid documents. Consequently C.R.No.39/2010 of Excise Range, Kuttampuzha was registered under Rule 9, 11(a) of the Spirituous Preparation (Control) Rule 1969 and r/w section 56(b) of the Abkari Act. Pursuant to its seizure the vehicle was produced before the authorised officer under section 67 B (1) of the Abkari Act and later it was entrusted to the Excise Inspector for keeping it under the safe custody. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner Ext.P7 order under section 67B of the Abkari Act was passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Excise. The vehicle was confiscated to Government invoking the power under 67B (2) of the Abkari Act. Aggrieved by Ext.P7 order the petitioner preferred Ext.P8 appeal. Later, alleging delay in the matter of its consideration the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.

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