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

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
M/S RAGHU EXPORTS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.JALANDHAR – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANOR – Respondent
CWP 46/2009



HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

***

CWP No. 46 of 2009

Date of decision: 12.01.2009

***

M/S Raghu Exports Versus

Union of India and another.

***

CORAM:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S.Thakur, CJ and

Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.Kannan.

***

Present:

Shri Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

***

T.S.Thakur CJ (Oral)

Issue notice of motion.

Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Standing Counsel for Union of India

appears on behalf of the respondents. With consent the petition has been

heard for final disposal.

The petitioners' grievance in the present writ petition is that

despite a request made as early as on December 04, 2008 in terms of

Annexure P-4, seeking release of the original shipping bills sezied from the

petitioner during the course of a search conducted on 17/18.12.2007, the

Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, has not considered the request nor

passed any orders on the subject. A mandamus directing the respondents

to return the documents in question has, therefore, been prayed for.

Mr. Kaushik, appearing for the respondents states that given

two weeks time, the competent authority would examine the request made

by the petitioner in terms of Annexure P-4, and pass appropriate orders, in

accordance with law under intimation to the petitioner.

In the circumstances, therefore, we consider it unnecessary to

keep this petition on our board. The same is disposed of with a direction to

the competent authority to examine the request made by the petitioner

-2-

CWP 46 of 2009.

for return of the documents sezied from it and to pass appropriate orders

on the same under intimation to the petitioner, expeditiously but not later

than four weeks from today.The petitioner shall have the liberty to seek

appropriate redress in accordance with law in case the request made by it

is declined by the concerned authority. No costs.

(T.S.Thakur)

Chief Justice

(K.Kannan)

Judge

January 12, 2009

Malik

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top