Archana Bazaz Vs Senior Joint Commissioner of Revenue (Calcutta High Court)
The Calcutta High Court, in the case of Archana Bazaz Vs Senior Joint Commissioner of Revenue, addressed a writ petition filed by Archana Bazaz, the owner of a godown, against the seizure and sealing of her property by revenue authorities. The petitioner, Archana Bazaz, had leased the godown to a tenant, respondent No. 6, under a leave and license agreement that expired on March 31, 2025. During the tenancy, the goods of the respondent were seized and the godown sealed by the authorities, preventing the petitioner from regaining possession and earning a license fee. The petitioner argued that she was unable to demand rent from the defunct tenant, respondent No. 6, while the godown remained sealed and inaccessible.
The court heard arguments from all parties. The revenue authorities stated that the tenant had not cooperated with their inspection. The tenant’s counsel informed the court that the company was defunct and could not provide an alternative space for the goods.
Considering the circumstances, the court directed the revenue authorities to take charge of and dispose of the seized goods at the risk and cost of the respondent. The court specified that if the tenant failed to cooperate, the authorities were at liberty to dispose of the goods in accordance with the law and hand over possession of the godown to the petitioner within three months. The court also held that any storage costs incurred by the authorities for the goods must be borne by the defunct company. Finally, the court ruled that any future notices to the respondent could be served on their advocate, which would constitute valid service. The court disposed of the writ petition without any order as to costs. This ruling establishes a clear precedent for landlords facing similar issues.
