2019 (10) TMI 1534 - HC - Benami Property

Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions - Withdrawal of appeal on getting alternative remedy - HELD THAT - When it is pointed out that the Petitioner has got an effective alternative remedy to challenge the order impugned in this Writ Petition by way of appeal under Section 46 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act 1988 before the Appellate Tribunal at New Delhi as mentioned therein the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Writ Petition with liberty to file such appeal and made an endorsement to that effect which is recorded. Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting such liberty. It is further open to the Petitioner to raise all legal issues in the proposed appeal. It is made clear that for the purpose of computing the period of limitation in filing the appeal the period from the date of presentation of the Writ Petition i.e. from 20.09.2019 till the date on which certified copy of this order is issued shall be excluded.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner seeking consideration of legal issues not addressed in earlier Writ Petition; availability of alternative remedy through appeal under Section 46 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988; permission sought to withdraw the Writ Petition.

Analysis:

The judgment delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.D. Audikesavalu of the Madras High Court pertains to a Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner. The Petitioner's Counsel argued that certain legal issues, previously granted liberty by the Court in an earlier Writ Petition, were not addressed by the First Respondent in the impugned order. The Counsel highlighted that an effective alternative remedy exists for challenging the impugned order through an appeal under Section 46 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, before the Appellate Tribunal in New Delhi. Consequently, the Petitioner sought permission to withdraw the current Writ Petition with liberty to file such an appeal, which was duly recorded by the Court.

The Court, after due consideration, dismissed the Writ Petition as withdrawn, granting the Petitioner the liberty to raise all legal issues in the proposed appeal. Additionally, the Court clarified that the period from the date of the Writ Petition's presentation until the issuance of the certified copy of the order would be excluded for computing the period of limitation for filing the appeal. The judgment further stated that the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed without imposing any costs on either party involved in the matter.

In essence, the judgment underscores the Court's recognition of the availability of an alternative legal remedy for the Petitioner and the subsequent decision to allow the withdrawal of the Writ Petition with liberty to pursue the appeal. The Court's ruling ensures that the Petitioner can address all legal issues in the upcoming appeal process while providing clarity on the exclusion of time for limitation purposes and the closure of related Miscellaneous Petitions.