SANGANAGOUDA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Avinash A. Uploankar, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner and Sri Manvendra Reddy, learned Government Advocate for respondents. This writ petition by the petitioner has to be construed as one filed at the instance of a creditor (father of petitioner) who owes Kist to the Government i.e., dues towards Excise and he has instigated his son-petitioner herein to stave-off the credit due and payable to State Exchequer.

(2.) Petitioner has sought for quashing of notice/order dated 20.09.2012-Annexure-C whereunder it is notified by first respondent that property referred to therein is being brought for auction towards excise dues to the tune of Rs. 49,81,606/- together with interest thereon and has called upon the public to participate in the proposed auction to be held on 06.10.2012, inter alia contending that properties described therein are joint family properties and petitioner is having right, title and interest over the same and respondent-authorities can sell only the property belonging to creditor and they cannot bring property belonging to joint family for sale.

(3.) Sri Avinash A. Uploankar, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner would also contend that under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 63 of Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, amount due to the Government from any person can be recovered from only the said person who is due to the Government and not from others like petitioner herein who possess right, title and interest over the property, which has been brought to sale by auction.