HEMLATA MADHUSUDAN PANCHAL Vs. SALES TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is challenging an order of attachment dtd. 26/09/2023 passed by Respondent No. 1, apparently under Rule 11 of the Maharashtra Realisation of Land Revenue Rules, 1967 ('the said Rules of 1967' for short) made under rule making power of the State Government under Sec. 328 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 ('the Code' for short). By the said impugned Order, the total/proportional right, title and interest of the Petitioner's son Jayesh Madhusudan Panchal, a proprietor of M/s. Sai Electricals in Flat No. 201, Hayat Palace Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Patel Compound, Pushpa Park, Daftary Road, Malad (West), Mumbai-400097 ('the said flat' for short), is attached for non payment of tax dues by said Mr. Jayesh. The Petitioner is also seeking directions to the Respondents to withdraw the said impugned order and restrain them from taking any steps in furtherance thereof.

(2.) At the outset it is necessary to note that neither rule making power of the State nor the competence of the Respondent No. 1 in issuing the impugned order is challenged. The challenge in the petition in limited based on Petitioner's right vis-a-vis the said flat, as will be clear in the narration to follow.

(3.) The case of the Petitioner is as under.