- (1.) FROM the order passed in L.P.A. No. 639 of 2001, which the petitioner has prayed for review, it appears that the appeal was disposed of the modifying the order of the learned Single Judge passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1403 of 2000 (R).
(2.) THE learned Single Judge had disposed of the said writ application with the following order which is quoted herein -below : "In the aforesaid background, the respondents, being liable to return the goods seized, if any of it stood stolen away from the place of storage, are bound to refund the amount to be calculated at the market rate. Accordingly, they are directed to make it good in favour of the petitioner by return of goods or paying the market price thereof with interest at the rate of 8% within two months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order." Therefore, what appears from the order quoted above is that the learned Single Judge directed either to return the goods to the writ petitioner or to pay the market price thereof with interest at the rate of 8% within two months,
(3.) IN L.P.A. No. 639 of 2001 the said order of the learned Single Judge was modified to the extent that the amount calculated by the licensee on the basis of the market rate at a sum of Rs. 24,35,520.00 which was directed to be paid to the writ petitioner with 8% interest was altered by holding that he would be entitled to get the price of seized goods, which were stolen away, on the rate, the goods other than those articles, which were stolen away, were sold in the year 1998 subject to the final decision of the Deputy Commissioner regarding the rate as per the order dated 1.7.1998 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1628 of 1998.;