P I FAROOK Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is filed with the prayers as follows:

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are seeking to forcibly evict the petitioner and his tenants from the property described in the prayer of the writ petition. THE petitioner claims that the property admeasuring an extent of 3.875 cents of land with a building thereon was purchased by the petitioner by a registered sale deed dated 9.6.2008. THE vendor is none other than the mother of the petitioner. It is asserted in the writ petition that the mother of the petitioner purchased the property from the 5th respondent herein on 29.8.1992 by a registered sale deed. At paragraph 5 of the writ petition it is stated as follows:

(3.) EXCEPT asserting that the petitioner's mother legally purchased the property from the 5th respondent, the petitioner did not even disclose the nature of the liability which the 5th respondent suffered under the above mentioned Act. Orders of confiscation against the 5th respondent were passed as long back as on 8.12.1994. However, the petitioner filed an application, I.A.No.14141 of 2010, praying that an additional document be received by this Court as Exhibit P8 in the writ petition. The said document is dated 17.8.2005, issued by the Competent Authority under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) & Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Acts. It can be seen from the above that proceedings were initiated against the 5th respondent and other members of the family under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act. The exact date of the initiation of the proceedings is not available from the said document. However, it appears, an order dated 17.11.1994 is passed under Section 7(1) of the Act forfeiting the properties specified therein to Government of India. The relevant portion of the said document reads as follows: