[2008] 15 S.C.R. 133
"'"
A
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.
v.
M/S. KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 6457-58 of 2008)
NOVEMBER 03, 2008
B
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM
--<
SHARMA, JJ.]
Practice and procedure - Interim matters - Adjudication
of - Categorical finding on merits by High Court - Propriety c
of - Held: Not proper - It was not the stage of doing so and
was beyond the scope of adjudication of writ petition - Thus,
order of High Court set aside - High Court to hear the matters
afresh - Constitution of India, Article 226.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos.
D
)..
6457-6458 of 2008.
From the Judgment and Order dated 5.9.2008 and
4.10.2008 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at
Chandigarh in CWP No. 13914 of 2008 and COCP No. 1536
E
of 2008 in CWP No. 13914 of 2008.
Gopal Subrama.nium, A.S.G., Harish Chandra, Rahul
'
Kaushik, Ameet Chander and Anil Katiyar for the Appellants.
-~
Mukul Rohtagi, S. Ganesh, Reetesh Singh. Janvi Wora,
F
Pranav Vyas and Surya Kant for the Respondents .
....-
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
.,.
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.1. Heard.
2. Though these matters were listed for admission,
G
learned counsel for the parties requested the matters to be
taken up for final disposal.
•
3. Leave granted.
133
H
134
[2008] 15 S.C.R. 134
A
4. We find that while adjudicating an interim m~atter, the
High Court has given a categorical finding on merits holding
inter-alia that there is nothing to show that even prima facie,
goods are liable to confiscation. The High Court appears to
have decided the matter on merits finally even though that was
B not the stage for doing so and was beyond the scope of
adjudication of the writ petition. This is not the way the High
Court should have dealt with the matter. Apart from that, the
· High Court has not indicated any reason as to why the condition
of execution of indemnity bond equivalent to seizure value of
c goods and/or furnishing of bank guarantee equal to 10% of
value of goods, as was stipulated by the authorities, was not
justified. This also adds to the vulnerability of the order. We set
aside the impugned orders of the High Court. Let the High
Court hear the matters afresh. To avoid unnecessary delay, let
0 the pqrties appear before the High Court, without further notice,
on 1i11.2008.
J,
E
5. The Hon'ble Chief Justice of the High Court is requested
to allot the matters, i.e. CWP No.13914/2008 and COCP
No.1536/2008 to an appropriate Bench.
6. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
N.J.
Appeals disposed of.
Lex