Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 777 - HC - CustomsRelease of Containers Sale by de-stuffed Carge Petitioner seeking direction upon respondents to release 202 containers by allowing container field stations to de-stuff cargo from containers and bring same for sale without insisting for any payment against him Held that;- petitioner submitted representation to second respondent and would be satisfied if decision was taken by second respondent on petitioner s representation as containers were lying in container field stations from 2008 onwards Direction issued to second respondent to consider petitioner s representation and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law Petition disposed of Decided in favour of Petitioner.
Issues Involved:
Petition seeking a writ of Mandamus to release containers from container freight station. Analysis: The petitioner, a private limited company and agent of a shipping company, leased containers for cargo transport and delivered them to Chennai Port. The containers, now lying uncleared at container freight stations, are the subject of the writ petition. The petitioner requests the release of these containers without any charges. The court notes that the issue of the containers being uncleared is not within the scope of the writ petition. The petitioner seeks a direction for the release of containers without payment. The writ petition was admitted, and notice was issued to the respondents. The respondents' counsel argues that the issue must be considered following the law. The petitioner's counsel mentions a representation submitted to the second respondent in 2012, emphasizing the need for a decision due to the containers remaining at the stations since 2008. The court, refraining from delving into the case's merits, directs the second respondent to review the petitioner's representation from 2012 and make a decision within three months after notifying all relevant parties. The court clarifies that it does not adjudicate the claims of either party. The writ petition is disposed of without costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
|