LAWS(J&K)-2008-7-45

MYAMOONA Vs. STATE OF J&K

Decided On July 03, 2008
Myamoona Appellant
V/S
STATE OF JANDK Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VEHICLE (tipper) bearing Registration No. JK04/2571, has been seized while carrying illicit timber. Confiscation proceedings in terms of Section 26 of the Forest Act were initiated followed by order of confiscation by the Authorized Officer (DFO). The order of confiscation has been successfully challenged before the Court of Sessions Judge, Budgam by one Mohammad Altaf Magray, whereunder proceedings had been quashed and vehicle ordered to be released in favour of the owner. The Owner collected the vehicle but in the meantime, order of learned Sessions Judge was challenged before this Court under Section 561 -A.Cr. PC. This Court has set aside the order of the Court of Sessions Judge on 22.07.2002. The Forest Department had to take action but seems to have slept over the matter till 20.09.2004.

(2.) RESPONDENT no. 6 is the Financer of the vehicle. For default of payments, Financer seems to have taken over the custody of the vehicle from its owner. Same has been put to auction. In the auction, petitioner also participated and found highest bidder. After payment of loan amount, custody of the vehicle was delivered to the petitioner in the year 2003. Subsequently, in the year 2004, Police concerned acting at the request of Forest Department, has taken over the custody of the vehicle from the possession of the petitioner.

(3.) PETITIONER faced with the situation filed suit for declaration for being declared owner of the vehicle. Respondent no. 6, Financer, in the written statement has admitted that, for default of the payment, vehicle was seized and put to auction, the petitioner purchased the same and custody was handed over to her. The other respondents, apart from filing written statement, have filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The Court of Sub -Judge, i.e. 2nd Civil Subordinate Judge, Srinagar accepted the application and rejected the plaint opining therein that the suit is barred as per Forest Act. Secondly, there is no cause of action available. Aggrieved thereof, the instant revision petition has been filed.