9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (3) TMI 78 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxWithdrawal of charge and attachment on property - recovery of alleged dues of erstwhile owner of the property - HELD THAT - It is clear that the respondents were directed to withdraw the charge and the attachment on the property, located at Plot No.4/C, Block No.211, Survey No.133/2, Village Karanj, Taluka Mandvi, District Surat, in respect of alleged dues of the erstwhile owner of the property namely Varun Filaments Private Limited under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003. However, the grievance voiced by the writ-applicant in the present Writ-Application is that till this date, directions issued by this Court, have not been complied with. One last opportunity is granted to the respondent No.2 to comply with the directions, issued by this Court - application disposed off.
Issues: Compliance with Court's Order for Withdrawal of Charge and Attachment on Property
Comprehensive Analysis: Issue 1: Compliance with Court's Order In this case, the writ-applicants sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to withdraw the charge and attachment on a specific property in compliance with a previous judgment. The Court noted that a previous order had directed the withdrawal of the charge and attachment on the property due to alleged dues of the erstwhile owner under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003. However, the writ-applicants contended that the directions had not been followed by the respondents until that date. The Court gave a final opportunity for compliance, setting a deadline of four weeks for the respondents to adhere to the directions issued in the previous judgment. Issue 2: Relief Sought The writ-applicants requested various reliefs, including the withdrawal of the charge and attachment on the property, pending notice, admission, and final hearing of the petition. They also sought ex parte ad interim relief, costs of the petition to be paid by the respondents, and any further relief deemed fit by the Court in the interest of justice. The Court's focus was primarily on ensuring compliance with the previous order directing the withdrawal of the charge and attachment on the property. Conclusion The Court's judgment primarily revolved around ensuring compliance with its previous order regarding the withdrawal of the charge and attachment on the property in question. By giving a final opportunity for compliance within a specified timeframe, the Court aimed to enforce its directives effectively. The writ-application was disposed of, emphasizing the importance of adhering to court orders and directions.
|
