STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. MANGAL TRADERS JAMNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These revision applications between the same parties involving the same questions are with the consent of parties heard and disposed of together as they involve common questions on similar facts. In all these matters arising from interim injunctions granted by the Civil Court against the seizure of essential commodity the State Government-original defendant is the petitioner and the opponent is a licensed dealer producer of the essential commodity namely edible oil. The opponent is running two oil mills: Asha Oil Mill and Ramdevji Oil Mill. There was a search on 1-10-1982 in these Oil Mills resulting into seizure of essential commodities. Civil Suit Nos. 863 of 1982 and 864 of 1982 were filed and the ex parte interim orders were obtained on 1 Civil Misc. Appeal Nos. 130 of 1982 and 131 of 1982 were preferred before the District Court against the ex parte orders. The District Court after allowing the parties to complete the pleadings and affidavit heard the appeals on merits and dismissed the same confirming the interim relief granted by the trial Court. Division Application Nos. 472 of 1983 and 474 of 1983 are preferred by the State Government. They are admitted. In those two matters the only interim relief prayed was stay of further proceedings in the suit and there was no stay prayed in respect of operation of the injunction This speaks volume for the care the State Government has failed to take) with the result that the essential commodities seized in these two cases have been released by interim Order of the Court and have been disposed of by the opponent- plaintiff.

(2.) On 3-2-1985 there was another search and seizure of the essential commodities and therefore a Civil Suit No. 135 of 1985 was filed by the same opponent-plaintiff and after hearing both the sides the trial Court passed an order of interim injunction as prayed on 14th Feb. 1985 restraining the authorities from giving effect to the seizure order and from obstructing the plaintiff from dealing with and disposing of the goods in question. However this time the learned trial Judge had imposed a condition to furnish solvent security of the value of the goods released namely Rs. 8 lacs. Against this order the authorities preferred Civil Misc. Appeal No. 44 of 1935 and the plaintiff also preferred Civil Misc. Appeal No. 45 of 1985 because the plaintiff felt aggrieved by the condition of security. The appellate Court dismissed the appeal of the State and allowed the appeal of the plaintiff. Thus confirming the interim injunction and removing the condition of security. Against these two orders arising from the similar facts the State has preferred two revision applications being Civil Revision Application No. 313 of 1985 and 314 of 1985. Since the material facts in all these cases are similar the facts of Civil Suit No. 135 of 1985 may be stated.

(3.) On 3-2-1985 the Additional District Magistrate issued a search warrant authorising the five named officers of the Civil Supplies Department to carry out search: