TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Writ Petition or in his subsequent counter affidavit dated 01.06.2015, there is not even a whisper about the suit pending on the very same issue. The petitioner cannot pursue his remedy simultaneously. Therefore, Prima facie, he has not filed this Writ Petition with clean hands - As rightly averred in the counter affidavit of the Customs, if any of the parties prove their claim by producing the original Bill of Lading and other materials to claim the cargo, the authorities are duty bound to release the same, since the goods are perishable in nature. If the owners of the goods is stalled to claim the goods before the Customs authorities, unnecessarily, demurrage charges will be levied by the Customs authorities for no fault of the real o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... process the export document without the knowledge of the petitioner. The first respondent directed the Superintendent (import) to hold the cargo till further orders on 08.05.2015. In the meanwhile, the petitioner has received a letter dated 16.05.2015 from the first respondent requesting him to produce the original bill of lading and invoice issued in the name of the petitioner, failing which, it was informed that necessary action would be taken in accordance with the provisions of Customs Act, 1962. It is the apprehension of the petitioner that the Cargo would be transferred to any third party or it may be auctioned. Hence, he has come forward with this Writ Petition for the relief stated supra. 3. Notice was ordered on 20.05.2015 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the interim order granted by this Court, the fourth respondent could not get the cargo cleared. Further, each and every day, demurrage charges are levied by the official respondents. Therefore, the fourth respondent is really put to peril, despite the fact that he is the owner of the goods in question. Eventually, he prayed for the dismissal of this Writ Petition. 6. Mr. B. Vijay Karthikeyan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Customs, has filed a detailed counter affidavit, in which, he takes through paragraph Nos. 3 and 8, by stating that due to the non-cooperation of the petitioner, the Foreign Supplier, namely, M/s. Raw Material and Commodity Company Nigeria Ltd, Nigeria vide letter dated 11.05.2015, forced to sell the car ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his Court finds that the issue involved in this Writ Petition is contractual obligations entered into between the parties, which cannot be gone into by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. That apart, there are disputed questions of facts involved in it, which also cannot be gone into in a Writ petition. Further, this Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry to give a definite finding either in favour of the petitioner or in favour of the private respondents as to who is the real owners. As rightly averred in the counter affidavit of the Customs, if any of the parties prove their claim by producing the original Bill of Lading and other materials to claim the cargo, the authorities are duty bound to release the same, since ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
