MUHAMMED KUNHI V V Vs. VENUGOPALAN K NAMBIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner had pledged some articles, according to him, with the first respondent, Venugopalan K. Nambiar. THE Income-tax Department had conducted a search and effected seizure of the articles from Venugopalan Nambiar, Proceedings are going on between the Department and Venugopalan Nambiar in relation to various matters in the course of the action initiated under the Income-tax Act. THE writ petition in which Venugopalan Nambiar has sought return of articles so seized, is pending before this court. As a matter of fact, the final hearing has been fixed on October 26, 1988.

(2.) THE present petition is from one who claims that he had pledged the articles with Venugopalan Nambiar. He does not have a cause of action directed against the Income-tax Department. THE larger contention that the Income-tax Department has no jurisdiction to seize the articles of a stranger assumes that the articles really belong to a stranger. That is a matter which has yet to be adjudicated. If the petitioner has got a case that he is the owner of the articles, he will have necessarily to establish the title over the same, initially. THE possible remedy then would be to institute a suit against the pledgee and bringing, if necessary, other parties, including the Department, on the party array. THEse proceedings could possibly be obviated if the petitioner awaits the final disposal of the writ petition which is expected to be heard within a short while. In these circumstances, I am disinclined to entertain this writ petition. THE dismissal of the writ petition will not preclude the exercise by the petitioner of his other remedies. It would appear that he would do well to wait for some little time.