High CourtsSingle Bench(2002) 12 MAD CK 0020

R. Kamaladasan vs The Revenue Divisional Officer and The Tahsildar

Madras High Court · Decided on 3 December 2002

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.P. Sivasubramaniam, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 39669 of 2002 and W.P.M.P. No. 59053 of 2002

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 295 words

K.P. Sivasubramaniam, J.—The petitioner prays for release of the vehicle belonging to him, namely, the lorry bearing Registration No.

TN.21.M.9585 seized on 23.10.2002.

2.

The learned Special Government Pleader submits that the vehicle has not been involved in any previous case. Therefore, the respondents are

directed to release the Lorry bearing Registration No. TN.21.M.9585 subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), a sum of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) towards

the value of the mineral and Rs. 500/- towards seigniorage fee respectively.

(ii) The petitioner shall also give an unconditional undertaking by way of an affidavit that the vehicle will not be used for illicit mining purposes and

that he will not part with or alienate the vehicle until the adjudication is over.

(iii) The petitioner shall also prove his ownership of the vehicle to the satisfaction of the authorities.

(iv) The petitioner shall also produce the vehicle once in two months before the respondents in order to ensure that condition No. 2 is properly

complied with.

3.

On compliance of condition Nos. 1 to 3, the respondents are directed to release the vehicle forthwith. The respondents are also directed to

initiate adjudication proceedings and complete the same. The disbursement of the amount of Rs. 20,000/- deposited by the petitioner would

depend on the outcome of the adjudication proceedings by the authorities.

4.

In the event of the petitioner not complying with condition No. iv, it will be open for the respondents to seize the vehicle without any further

notice to the petitioner.

5.

With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, no order is necessary in W.P.M.P. No. 59053 of 2002 and

the same is closed.