Mr.Shakil Ahmed Khan v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, this Petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. To get over this position, Counsel for the Petitioner would contend that insofar as the above numbered motor tanker is concerned, there is no order of confiscation. This contention is clearly contrary to the contents of the order dated 30th March 2005. The order…
- Para 44. Accordingly, this Petition is dismissed with liberty to the Petitioner to take recourse to remedy of appeal provided under Section 6C of the : 3 : Essential Commodities Act, 1955 which, in turn, will be decided on its own merits in accordance with law.
Judgment
Mr.Shakil Ahmed Khan ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents ...... Mr.A.K.Singh with Mr.V.K.Singh for Petitioner. Ms.S.V.Gajare, A.P.P. for Respondents. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. NOVEMBER 23, 2005. NOVEMBER 23, 2005. NOVEMBER 23, 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C.
Preliminary objection is raised by the learned A.P.P. that the Petitioner intends to challenge order dated 30th March 2005, which is order of confiscation passed in respect of motor tanker No.MH-04-AH-1415. Against such order, statutory remedy of appeal is provided by virtue of Section 6C of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and that, the Petitioner has not availed of that remedy before approaching this Court. I find : 2 : substance in the above objection taken on behalf of the Respondents.
To get over this position, Counsel for the Petitioner would contend that insofar as the above numbered motor tanker is concerned, there is no order of confiscation. This contention is clearly contrary to the contents of the order dated 30th March 2005. The order clearly records that the said vehicle has been confiscated (japt muddemal). The Concise Law Dictionary by Shri Vivek D.Joshi mentions that confiscation means japt. Accordingly, the stand taken on behalf of the Petitioner cannot be accepted.
As mentioned earlier, I am in agreement with the preliminary objection taken on behalf of the Respondent State.
Operative part
Accordingly, this Petition is dismissed with liberty to the Petitioner to take recourse to remedy of appeal provided under Section 6C of the : 3 : Essential Commodities Act, 1955 which, in turn, will be decided on its own merits in accordance with law.
Petition disposed of on the above terms. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 30 Mar 2005. The bench was A M KHANWILKAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.