9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (1) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct, 1961 (for short, "the Act"), against the petitioners and pray for issuance of an appropriate writ or directions. The facts for the purpose of disposal of this writ petition are : Both the petitioners are assesses under the Act and are assessed by the third respondent. The petitioners are also assessed under the Wealth-tax Act by the Wealth-tax Officer, Ward-II(2), Guwahati. The petitioners have their permanent residence at Fancy Bazar, Guhawati, and have a temporary residence situated at BE-8, Salimar Bagh, Delhi. The petitioners have to visit Delhi from time to time in connection with their business and in the course of such visits they use the said residence for their temporary stay. The petitioners have a joint residence at Guwa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ker had been sealed by the respondent authority on March 2, 1995, in exercise of the power under section 132(3) of the Act and that no further operation would be permitted in respect of the said locker till the restrictions imposed were withdrawn. The petitioners further state that the fact about the sealing of the locker and actions proposed in respect thereto were intimated to them by the bank manager for the first time and they had no intimation in this regard from the respondent authorities. Later, by communication dated March 16, 1995/March 20, 1995, issued by the second respondent, the petitioners were informed that the bank locker in question would be opened on March 28, 1995, and the petitioners were directed to be present at the ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act in the name of the petitioners. In the absence of such authorisation, the authority vested with the power to issue such authorisation could not have any occasion to consider the existence of any of the conditions precedent prescribed under sub-clauses (a), (b) and (c) of section 132(1) of the Act as the satisfaction is a condition precedent to exercise the power of search and seizure under section 132(1) or 132(1A) of the Act. The contention of the petitioner is that the aforesaid search and seizure is ex facie illegal and there was no valid seizure either under sub-section (1) or (1A) of section 132 of the Act. The purported proceedings under section 132(5) of the Act sought to be initiated by the third respondent by issuing the impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submits that the petition itself is not maintainable inasmuch as no part of cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this court and, therefore, this court may not exercise its jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution. In respect of the merits, Mr. Joshi submits that there were enough materials before the authorities concerned to arrive at the satisfaction and, therefore, the action of the respondents in making search and seizure and subsequent issuance of notice was fully justified and no interference is called for. On the rival contentions of the parties, the following two points require determination : (1) Whether this petition is maintainable and whether this court has the jurisdiction to entertain this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er High Court. As a result of insertion of clause (2), a petition under article 226 can be presented before any of the High Courts if the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the person or authority against whom relief is sought resides or situate and if the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the cause of action in respect of which relief is sought under article 226 has arisen, wholly or in part. The meaning of "cause of action" is well understood. It means a bundle of facts which gives rise to a civil litigation. In that light, let us see whether the cause of action or any part thereof arises within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. In the instant case it is now to be seen whether any part of the cause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emselves have clearly stated that they were in no way connected with Ratan Lal Saraogi and Pradeep Kumar Saraogi. Again, in paragraph 3 of the reply affidavit to the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the second respondent, the petitioners have stated that they had no connection with the family of Ratan Lal Saraogi and Pradeep Kumar Saraogi. I have also gone through the records placed before me. The record also does not indicate that there was any instruction from the income-tax authority at Guwahati to make search of the petitioners' locker. The income-tax authority in Delhi either by accident or on their own had made the aforesaid search and seizure. The action may be illegal and without jurisdiction but definitely the cause of ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
