THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SINGLA BROTHERS AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal by the State of Himachal Pradesh is directed against the Judgment and order of our brother C.R. Thakur allowing a writ petition filed by the Respondents.

(2.) Messrs Mahabir Trading Company carry on business as grain dealers at Solan. A surprise check was made of their business premises on July 8, 1975. Among other things it was discovered that 435 bags of rice were kept in the go down and had not been shown in the stock list which the dealers were required to maintain under the Himachal Pradesh Commodities Price Marking and Display Order, 1975. The police seized the bags of rice and registered a case against the dealers for contravention of the aforesaid Order. A Special Tribunal, constituted under Sec. 7 of the Defence and Internal Security of India Act, 1971, tried the accused. The accused pleaded that the bags of rice did not belong to them but to Messrs Singla Brothers, the present Respondents, and alleged that they did not possess any stock of rice and for that reason had made no reference to the bags of rice in the stock list. However, they pleaded guilty of having committed the offence of not making the entry "out of stock" against the commodity of rice in the list. The Special Tribunal accepted the plea, and convicted and sentenced the accused for the omission to make that entry. That order was made on September 11, 1975. While the case against Messrs Mahabir Trading Company was pending before the Special Tribunal, an application was made by the present Respondents for release of the rice on the ground that they, as owners of the rice, were entitled to possession. The Special Tribunal rejected the application on the ground that the present Respondents had not proved that they were owners of the rice and observed that they could, if so advised, file a suit for a declaration of their title. After dismissing the application they made the aforesaid order dated September 11,1975, convicting and sentencing the accused towards the end of the order the Tribunal observed that the application of the present Respondents for possession of the rice having failed the goods stood confiscated and it directed the Magistrate to take steps for their immediate disposal.

(3.) According to the present Respondents, when the order was passed rejecting their application for return of the rice to them they instituted a suit the next day, September 12, 1975, in the court of the Subordinate Judge for a declaration that they were the owners of the rice and for an injunction restraining Messrs Mahabir Trading Company from disposing of the rice. The State was impleaded as a proforma Defendant. It is said that no relief was claimed against the order of confiscation made by the Tribunal as the present Respondents had no knowledge of that order at that time. It is alleged that subsequently the present Respondents came to know of that order and on September 17, 1975, a writ petition, out of which the present appeal arises, was filed in this Court praying for relief against the order of confiscation. It was mentioned in paragraph 13 of the writ petition that a suit had been filed but because of the subsequent order of confiscation passed by the Tribunal the suit had become infructuous.