IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP.No. 12917 of 2002(K)
1. LAKSHMANAN PILLAI, AGED 68 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. COMPETENT AUTHORITY,
3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VANCHIYOOR,
4. S. MUTHUSWAMY, S/O. SUBRAMONIAN ACHARY
For Petitioner :SRI.K.L.NARASIMHAN
For Respondent :SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI, SCGSC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :26/03/2009
O R D E R
S. Siri Jagan, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
O.P. No. 12917 of 2002
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this, the 26th March, 2009.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner claims to be a bona fide purchaser of a property
in respect of which notice under Section 6(1) of the Smugglers and
Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976
was issued. The petitioner’s contention is that since he is a bona fide
purchaser of the property, unaware of the proceedings under the
Act, he cannot be penalised for the action of his vendor.
2. Learned Assistant Solicitor General submits that the
purchase by the petitioner was after the issue of notice under Section
6(1) of the Act. It is pointed out that under Section 11 of the Act, such
transfers are void. The Assistant Solicitor General also relies on the
decision of the Supreme Court in Aamenabai Tayebaly & others v.
Competent Authority under SAFEMA & others, AIR 1998 SC 484.
3. I have heard both sides.
4. Admittedly, the purchase was after issue of Section 6(1)
notice. Section 11 of the Act reads thus:
“CERTAIN TRANSFERS TO BE NULL AND VOID:- Where
after the issue of a notice under Sec. 6 or Sec. 10, any property
referred to in the said notice is transferred by any mode
whatsoever such transfer shall, for the purpose of the
proceedings under this Act, be ignored and if such property is
subsequently forfeited to the Central Government under Sec. 7,
then the transfer of such property shall be deemed to be null and
void.”
Going by Section 11, any transfer of property by any mode
whatsoever after the issue of a notice under Section 6 of the Act is to
be ignored and if the property is subsequently forfeited to Central
Government under Section 7, transfer of such property shall be
deemed to be null and void. In view of such provision the petitioner
cannot contend that since he was a bona fide purchaser, the property
O.P. No.12917/2002 -: 2 :-
cannot be forfeited. The issue is also covered by the decision in
Aamenabai’s case.
In the above circumstances, I do not find any merit in the
original petition. Accordingly, the original petition is dismissed.
Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.
Tds/