{"id":170111,"date":"2007-09-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-09-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007"},"modified":"2016-02-23T04:00:28","modified_gmt":"2016-02-22T22:30:28","slug":"k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007","title":{"rendered":"K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C) No. 23828 of 2007(J)\n\n\n1. K.J.THANKACHAN, KUTTUVELITHARA HOUSE,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. K.V.JOSEPH, KALAYEZHATH HOUSE,\n3. K.M.XAVIER, ABJO BHAVAN,\n4. P.S.SASIDHARAN, KALATHILPARAMBIL,\n5. V.BIJUKUMAR, VAROORUTHIL,\n6. SUMATHI, VELIKKAKATH,\n7. SELVARAJ, ARAMURIYIL,\n8. ALBINA JOSEPH, KALAYEZHATH,\n9. VIJITHA, KOKKALAMPARAMBIL,\n10. RADHA ASOKAN, PERUNILA HOUSE,\n11. P.P.APPACHAN, PERIYAPARAMBU,\n12. REMANI, PERINGATTU HOUSE,\n13. SALILA MOHANDAS, KOLLARANIKARTHIL,\n14. SUMA SIVADAS, KOLLARANIKARTHIL,\n15. AMBIKA BABU, PERUNILA,\n16. THANKACHAN MATHEW, KALEZHATH,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. EXCISE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, CHERTHALA.\n\n3. BAHULEYAN, POZHITHARA HOUSE,\n\n4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH\n\n Dated :25\/09\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n                         K.M.JOSEPH, J.\n                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n               W.P.(c).No. 23828 OF 2007\n              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n            Dated this the 25th day of September, 2007\n\n                              JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
     Petitioners have approached this court challenging Ext.P8.<\/p>\n
They seek an order of injunction restraining the third respondent<\/p>\n
in conducting the toddy shop and to direct the fourth respondent<\/p>\n
not to grant any police assistance to the third respondent in<\/p>\n
conducting the toddy shop.              According to the petitioners if<\/p>\n
permission is granted to the third respondent to conduct toddy<\/p>\n
shop in the property owned by Sri.Mohanan , it will definitely<\/p>\n
result in unhealthy and precarious situation and will hinder the<\/p>\n
peaceful atmosphere of the locality. Petitioners have submitted a<\/p>\n
mass petition as Ext.P1. There is inaction and it resulted in Ext.P2<\/p>\n
being submitted.        According to the petitioners they have<\/p>\n
approached this court and Ext.P3 was passed. Ext.P4 is the copy<\/p>\n
of the report published in Madhyamam daily. Like wise Exts.P5,<\/p>\n
P6 and P7 are paper reports relied on by the petitioners. By Ext.P8<\/p>\n
sanction was granted for shifting the toddy shop to the property<\/p>\n
owned by Sri.Mohanan.\n<\/p>\n
WPC No.23828\/07                    2<\/span><\/p>\n
      2.     I  heard    learned    counsel    for   the    petitioner<\/p>\n
Sri.P.V.Jayachandran and the learned counsel for the third<\/p>\n
respondent besides the learned Government Pleader. This court<\/p>\n
appointed an Advocate Commissioner to submit a report.               A<\/p>\n
report is filed.\n<\/p>\n
      3.     Learned counsel for the petitioners urges three<\/p>\n
grounds. He would submit that under the conditions of licence,<\/p>\n
toddy shop can be conducted only in a building. He would point<\/p>\n
out the photograph of the proposed building to contend that there<\/p>\n
is no building. It is further contended that there is one temple<\/p>\n
within 400 metres of the proposed site. Finally it is contended<\/p>\n
that there is a family welfare centre within 400 metres.<\/p>\n
      4.     Per contra, learned counsel for the third respondent<\/p>\n
would contend that they were given licence on 07\/05\/2007 at<\/p>\n
another place situated 1km. away. It is submitted that there was<\/p>\n
protest and therefore ultimately Ext.P8 was passed granting<\/p>\n
permission for shifting.\n<\/p>\n
      5.     As far as the plea that there is no building, it is not in<\/p>\n
dispute that there is no pleading in this regard.         Of course,<\/p>\n
learned counsel      for the petitioners relies on the photograph.<\/p>\n
Learned counsel for the third respondent submits that in fact the<\/p>\n
WPC No.23828\/07                  3<\/span><\/p>\n
existing building was destroyed by some persons and he would<\/p>\n
submit that pursuant to Ext.P8, toddy shop will be conducted only<\/p>\n
in conformity with the terms and conditions in the licence.<\/p>\n
      6.   As regards the question whether it is violative of Rule<\/p>\n
7(2) because there is a temple as reported by the Advocate<\/p>\n
Commissioner, the contention of the third respondent is that it is<\/p>\n
not a temple as defined under Rule 2(m) of the Kerala Abkari<\/p>\n
Auction Rules. He relies on the decision reported in Falgunan v.<\/p>\n
Asst. Excise Commissioner ( 1994(1)KLT 159). Therein the<\/p>\n
learned Single Judge (as his lordship then was) held as follows:<\/p>\n
             ” The main thrust of the argument of the<\/p>\n
       petitioner’s counsel is that Manikandanal Sree<\/p>\n
       Subramania temple could be considered as a<\/p>\n
       temple on the basis of the meaning given to the<\/p>\n
       word ” temple” in common parlance and it is<\/p>\n
       argued that the definition of the temple given in<\/p>\n
       the Abkari Shops ( Disposal in Auction) Rules gives<\/p>\n
       a different meaning to temple and that any<\/p>\n
       structure on the road side, pavement or a private<\/p>\n
       property cannot be said to be a temple. It is also<\/p>\n
       contended that in order to make a temple the<\/p>\n
       deity must have been installed under a building<\/p>\n
       and any shed or temporary structure will not come<\/p>\n
       under its definition. Going by the definition given<\/p>\n
WPC No.23828\/07                   4<\/span><\/p>\n
       under Rule 2(ka) it is clear that in order to make a<\/p>\n
       temple it must be a place of public religious<\/p>\n
       worship where the deity is installed under a<\/p>\n
       building. Any other place of worship which is only<\/p>\n
       a structure may not come under the definition of<\/p>\n
       temple.   The presence or absence of deity in the<\/p>\n
       structure is immaterial for the purpose.         The<\/p>\n
       important aspect is that whether there is any<\/p>\n
       building as such and the deity is installed under<\/p>\n
       that building. Admittedly, there is a structure in<\/p>\n
       the form of a shed.        The photograph of this<\/p>\n
       structure was shown to me by the petitioner’s<\/p>\n
       counsel as well as the Government Pleader. The<\/p>\n
       shed is erected a the place where the huge banian<\/p>\n
       tree was standing.     The platform of the tree is<\/p>\n
       about 4 ft. height from the ground level. There are<\/p>\n
       no steps leading to the place where the deity is<\/p>\n
       installed. There is no compound wall surrounding<\/p>\n
       this place.  It is difficult to hold that the place<\/p>\n
       where the deity is installed is a building. It could<\/p>\n
       only be said to be a structure and, therefore, in my<\/p>\n
       view, Manikandanal Sree Subramania temple<\/p>\n
       cannot be said to a temple as defined under the<\/p>\n
       Abkari Shops ( Disposal in Auction) Rules. I hasten<\/p>\n
       to add that it may be a temple for other purposes<\/p>\n
       and several persons might have been worshiping<\/p>\n
       this place and treating it as a temple in its full<\/p>\n
WPC No.23828\/07                   5<\/span><\/p>\n
        sense. But, going by the definition in the Rules,<\/p>\n
        the deity could be said to have been installed in a<\/p>\n
        structure by the road side and such a temple is<\/p>\n
        specifically excluded from the purview of the<\/p>\n
        definition given under the Rules.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      7.    Learned counsel for the third respondent invited my<\/p>\n
attention to the contents of the report of the Advocate<\/p>\n
Commissioner to contend that it cannot be treated as a temple<\/p>\n
within the meaning of the Rule.\n<\/p>\n
      8.    Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner would<\/p>\n
contend that the said decision is inapplicable to the facts of this<\/p>\n
case. As small it may be, there is a building where public worship<\/p>\n
is offered, it is contended. As regards the family welfare centre is<\/p>\n
concerned, of course, learned counsel for the petitioners does not<\/p>\n
dispute the fact that there is no statutory prohibition against the<\/p>\n
location of toddy shop within 400 metres of the same.<\/p>\n
      9. Therefore the question to be considered is whether the<\/p>\n
temple is a temple within the meaning of the Rule. Admittedly it<\/p>\n
is located within 400 mtrs. going by the report of the<\/p>\n
Commissioner. The report of the Advocate Commissioner would<\/p>\n
show that it is a family temple. It is stated that there is no name<\/p>\n
highlighted anywhere in the vicinity of the temple.    It is located<\/p>\n
WPC No.23828\/07                      6<\/span><\/p>\n
about 44.15 metres away from the tar road. It is stated that in the<\/p>\n
western side of the said temple there is a structure made of bricks<\/p>\n
and cement.        The foundation is black coloured and super<\/p>\n
structure is yellow coloured and the door is blue coloured and the<\/p>\n
roof is red in colour.       It is stated that the deity could not be<\/p>\n
witnessed as according to the petitioners for opening the doors it<\/p>\n
requires the presence of a poojari.        Going by the definition of<\/p>\n
temple, a temple means a place of public religious worship where<\/p>\n
the deity is installed under a building.\n<\/p>\n
      I find it difficult to accept the case of the petitioners even<\/p>\n
assuming that there is a deity that it is installed in a building.<\/p>\n
Ofcourse, the question of public worship is also a condition to be<\/p>\n
satisfied. At any rate it is clear that there is no building as such in<\/p>\n
which the deity could be said to be installed. Accordingly, I reject<\/p>\n
the contention of the petitioners based on there being a temple<\/p>\n
within the prohibited area of the proposed site in Ext.P8. If that<\/p>\n
be so, I find that objection to Ext.P8 on that score cannot be<\/p>\n
accepted. Therefore I reject the contentions of the petitioners<\/p>\n
and dismiss the writ petition. However, I make it clear that this<\/p>\n
will not prevent the petitioners seeking to invoke the power under<\/p>\n
Section 54 of The Kerala Abkari Act or Rule 7(3) of The Kerala<\/p>\n
WPC No.23828\/07                  7<\/span><\/p>\n
Abkari Shops Disposal Rules 2002.         Learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioners points out that in regard to the building in which the<\/p>\n
toddy shop is going to be conducted vide Exhibit P8, permission<\/p>\n
has been cancelled by the Panchayat.        According to the third<\/p>\n
respondent, it is not correct and there is permission. I make it<\/p>\n
clear that dismissal of the writ petition should not be understood<\/p>\n
as meaning that the third respondent can conduct the toddy shop<\/p>\n
in the premises covered by Ext.P8 unless there is valid permission<\/p>\n
granted by the local authority.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                           (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)<\/p>\n
sv.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C) No. 23828 of 2007(J) 1. K.J.THANKACHAN, KUTTUVELITHARA HOUSE, … Petitioner 2. K.V.JOSEPH, KALAYEZHATH HOUSE, 3. K.M.XAVIER, ABJO BHAVAN, 4. P.S.SASIDHARAN, KALATHILPARAMBIL, 5. V.BIJUKUMAR, VAROORUTHIL, 6. SUMATHI, VELIKKAKATH, 7. SELVARAJ, ARAMURIYIL, 8. ALBINA JOSEPH, KALAYEZHATH, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-170111","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nK.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-22T22:30:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-22T22:30:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1415,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007\",\"name\":\"K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-22T22:30:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-22T22:30:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007","datePublished":"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-22T22:30:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007"},"wordCount":1415,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007","name":"K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-22T22:30:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-j-thankachan-vs-assistant-excise-commissioner-on-25-september-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K.J.Thankachan vs Assistant Excise Commissioner on 25 September, 2007"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/170111","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=170111"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/170111\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=170111"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=170111"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=170111"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}