TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 686X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt or demurrage on the goods for the entire period i.e., from 02.12.2016 till it was cleared on 06.01.2017. The question of now interpreting the order are extending partial relief is not permissible as the Regulation uses the expression shall not charge any rent or demurrage. This, mandates that the third respondent is prohibited from charging any rent or demurrage during the period of detention. This having been certified by the second respondent, there is no escape from the rigour of Regulation No.6(1)(l). Thus, the matter is not contractual, but it involves the implementation of a statutory regulation. Therefore, the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner is maintainable. The rent/demurrage on the goods which were detained at the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailand to Chennai Port on 13.11.2016 and were shifted through HSN Shipping Pvt., Ltd., and warehoused at the respective third respondent container terminal. The Principal Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-III, Commissionerate detained the consignment between 02.12.2016 to 27.12.2016 and ultimately release order was issued only on 27.12.2016. The petitioner seeks for waiver of the detention charges on the ground that the detention was not on account of their fault, as the Department had detained the goods and the Department has directed grant of waiver of the charges from 02.12.2016 to 27.12.2016, the third respondent should waive the charges and permit the release of the goods. 4. The third respondent in both the Writ Petitions have filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of India. 6. Heard Mr.G.Punniakoti learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.S.Rajasekar, learned Senior Panel counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.1 2 and Mr.S.Dhayaleswaran and Mr.P.Giridharan, learned counsel for the respective third respondents. 7. The undisputed fact is that the goods in question were detained at the instance of the 1st and 2nd respondents, who had undertaken an investigation on the cargo. By communication, dated 28.12.2016, the second respondent informed the respective third respondents that the consignment was detained by the SIIB from 02.12.2016 to 27.12.2016 and as per Regulation 6(1)(l) of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Area Regulation, 2009, the custodian shall not charge rent or demurrage for the good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sought to be made for the period from 28.12.2016 to 06.01.2017. In my considered view this is unreasonable because after the order was passed on 28.12.2016, effective steps have been taken by the petitioner to clear the cargo and it has been done in the shortest possible time on 06.01.2017. Therefore, the third respondent should waive the rent or demurrage on the goods for the entire period i.e., from 02.12.2016 till it was cleared on 06.01.2017. 10. With regard to the Container Terminal, the third respondent in W.P.No.6453 of 2017, namely, M/s.K.Steamship Agencies, it appears that they have given only 25% waiver. This action of the third respondent is contrary to the statutory regulation namely, Regulation No.6(1)(l). The third responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
