IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL  APPEAL  NO. 2400  OF 2008

[Arising out of SLP(C) No.1091/2004]

ANIL KUMAR SAHOO ... APPELLANT(S)

:VERSUS:

AMAL KUMAR SAHOO AND ORS. ... RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

Delay condoned.

Leave granted.

From our order dated 18.2.2008,  it  appears  that  Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee,

learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, did not press the special leave

petition in respect of grant of licence for petroleum products. So far as grant of licence

in respect of Kerosene is concerned, it appears that the appellant has pressed its claim

on the basis of being the surviving partner of M/s. P.K. Sahoo. However, the private

respondents are claiming their right to carry out business in Kerosene on the ground

of inheritance.  

-2-

In view of the rival claims of the parties, we are of the opinion that interest of

justice would be subserved if the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, South, in the District

of  Midnapore  is  directed  to  decide  the  aforementioned  dispute.   We  direct

accordingly.  

The controversy may be resolved between the parties by the said authority,

without in any way being influenced by the observations made by the authorities as

also by the High Court in their judgments.  

The respondent company shall grant licence in terms of the said order.  

The impugned judgment is, therefore, set aside and the matter is remitted to

Sub-Divisional  Officer,  Sadar,  South,  in  the  District  of  Midnapore.  The  appeal  is

disposed of with the aforementioned direction.

..........................J (S.B. SINHA)

..........................J   (LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA)    NEW DELHI, MARCH 31, 2008.