High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition as Withdrawn in Excise License Matter — Petitioner's Counsel Submits Duplicate Filing. Court grants liberty to pursue other writ petition.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 136
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, M/s Sannidhi Enterprises, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, challenging an order dated 20.02.2020 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Excise (Bengaluru South) purportedly under Rule 17-B of the Karnataka Excise License (General Conditions) Rules, 1967. The petitioner sought quashing of the said order. However, at the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Bharath Kumar V, submitted on instruction that the present writ petition was nothing but a duplicate filing of another petition. Consequently, he sought to withdraw the petition. The court, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. B. Bajanthri, allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the petition as withdrawn, reserving liberty to the petitioner to pursue the other writ petition. The order was passed on 09.07.2020 via video conference.

Headnote

A) Excise Law - Withdrawal of Petition - Duplicate Filing - Petitioner's counsel submitted that the present writ petition was a duplicate filing and sought withdrawal - Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn with liberty to pursue the other writ petition - Held that the petition is dismissed as withdrawn (Para 1).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the writ petition should be allowed or dismissed as withdrawn due to being a duplicate filing.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to pursue the other writ petition.

Law Points

  • Withdrawal of petition
  • Duplicate filing
  • Liberty to pursue other petition
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (KAR) (07) 242

Writ Petition No.8646 of 2020 (EXCISE)

2020-07-09

P. B. Bajanthri

Bharath Kumar V

M/s Sannidhi Enterprises

State of Karnataka, Deputy Commissioner, Excise

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an excise order.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of order dated 20.02.2020 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Excise.

Filing Reason

Petitioner challenged an order under Rule 17-B of the Karnataka Excise License (General Conditions) Rules, 1967.

Issues

Whether the writ petition is maintainable or is a duplicate filing.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel submitted that the petition is a duplicate filing and sought withdrawal.

Ratio Decidendi

A writ petition that is a duplicate filing may be withdrawn with liberty to pursue the original petition.

Judgment Excerpts

Learned counsel for the petitioner on instruction submits that the present writ petition is nothing but filing of writ petition in duplication. Therefore, he intends to withdraw the present petition.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.8646 of 2020 before the High Court of Karnataka. At the hearing, counsel sought withdrawal on the ground of duplicate filing. The court dismissed the petition as withdrawn on 09.07.2020.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
  • Karnataka Excise License (General Conditions) Rules, 1967: Rule 17-B
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Allows Appeal by Claimants in Motor Accident Case, Setting Aside Tribunal's Finding of 30% Contributory Negligence and Enhancing Compensation. The Court Held That Mere Non-production of a Driving Lice...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Hears FERA Appeals Against Penalty for Non-Realisation of Export Proceeds; Considers Whether Exporter Took Reasonable Steps Under Section 18(2) FERA. Court Examines Legality of Show Cause Notice and Effect of Pending RBI Write-Off A...