9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Calculation of interest on seized currency notes. 2. Interpretation of appellate order regarding interest payment. 3. Amendment of prayer in the writ petition and impleadment of the proposed second respondent. Analysis: 1. The petitioner sought a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to challenge the second respondent's order seizing Indian currency notes and imposing a penalty. The Appellate Tribunal directed the return of the currency notes but a dispute arose regarding the calculation of interest. The Tribunal initially refunded a sum with interest, which the petitioner contested, arguing that interest should be calculated from the date of seizure, not from the date of deposit by the Department. The Tribunal rejected this contention, leading to the writ petition. 2. The High Court analyzed the orders and found that while the initial direction was for a refund without specifying interest from the date of seizure, a subsequent application led to an order for payment with interest at 12% per annum. The Court held that interest should be calculated at least from the date of the appellate order, as the liability to pay the amount arose then or earlier. The Court referred to a precedent to support the decision that interest accrues from the date of the appellate order, not the date of deposit. 3. The Court allowed amendments to the prayer in the writ petition and the impleadment of the proposed second respondent. Ultimately, the Court partially allowed the writ petition, directing the respondents to calculate interest at 12% per annum on the refunded amount from the date of the appeal's disposal until the payment order date. Any additional amount due was to be paid within one month from the present order, with no costs awarded. The connected miscellaneous petitions were closed as a result of the judgment.
|
