Ordinary meaning of "consignor" governs Form 27B signature requirements; seller is not the consignor unless it sent the goods.

A statutory declaration in Form 27B was held valid because the term "consignor" was given its ordinary meaning: the person actually sending the goods must sign, and a seller is not the consignor merely by virtue of ownership or sale. On the admitted facts, the petitioners had booked the vehicle and arranged the movement of goods, so the consignor objection failed. As other matters still required statutory investigation, immediate final interference was declined, the inquiry was directed to be completed within a stipulated time, and the petitioners were left to pursue the statutory appeal after the final order.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the declaration in form 27B was defective for want of signature of the consignor; and (ii) whether the petitioners were entitled to immediate quashing of the detention in view of the further investigation contemplated by the statute.

Issue (i): Whether the declaration in form 27B was defective for want of signature of the consignor.

Analysis: Rule 35(13)(c) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules required the declaration under section 29A(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 to be in form 27B, and rule 35(14) required it to be filled in and signed by the consignor. The word "consignor" was not defined, so its ordinary meaning was adopted. On the admitted facts, the petitioners had booked the vehicle, had purchased the goods, and were the persons sending the goods from Pondicherry to Mahe. The distillery had not sent the goods and therefore could not be treated as the consignor merely because it was the seller.

Conclusion: The declaration was not defective, and the objection that it was unsigned by the consignor was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioners were entitled to immediate quashing of the detention in view of the further investigation contemplated by the statute.

Analysis: Even though the signature objection failed, the record disclosed other matters requiring detailed investigation. Section 29A(4) contemplated continuation of the statutory inquiry, and the petitioners were also left with the remedy of appeal under section 34 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 if aggrieved by the final order passed after investigation. In these circumstances, the court directed completion of the pending investigation within a stipulated time instead of interfering further at that stage.

Conclusion: Immediate final relief was declined, and the petitioners were left to pursue the statutory remedy after the investigation.

Final Conclusion: The court held that the declaration objection was unsustainable, but the matter was not finally terminated in the petitioners' favour because further statutory investigation and the appellate remedy under the Act were left open.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory declaration is required to be signed by the consignor, the term must be given its ordinary meaning, and the seller is not the consignor unless it is shown that the seller actually sent the goods; mere ownership or sale does not make the seller the consignor.

---