Allowed

P.D.Singhvi v. Dr. G.K. Pillai and Anr.

Bombay HC6 Aug 2009WP/435/1990

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court made a writ petition absolute under Order 39 Rule 2 CPC. A prior interim order directed the petitioner to deposit 50% of the CIF value as fine and 20% as penalty with a bank guarantee. The appellate bench imposed these requirements; the current order withdraws those directions and orders the return of deposited amounts and cancellation of the bank guarantee.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to return the deposited fine, penalty, and cancelled bank guarantee within six weeks.

P.D.Singhvi Vs Dr. G.K. Pillai and Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

Mgn

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.435 OF 1990

¶4

Prakash D.Sanghvi..Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

G.K. Pillai & Ors....Respondents

¶7

Mr. Kamal Bulchandani with Mr. Tulsi Jhaveri & Mr. N.M.
Shah, for the Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. A.S. Rao & Mr. R.B. Pardeshi, for the Respondents.

¶9

CORAM : F.I. REBELLO &

¶10

 D.G.KARNIK, JJ.

¶11

 DATED : 6th August, 2009

¶12

P.C.

¶13

It is not necessary to set out the facts in detail.
The very issue had been referred to a larger Bench of
the Tribunal at New Delhi in the case of Sanwah Micro
System Pvt. Ltd. vs. Collector of Customs, Madras, 2000
(118) E.L.T. 294 (Tribunal-LB),. That decision has been
accepted by the Collectorate at Madras. On instructions
learned Counsel for the Respondents points out that the
Collectorate in Mumbai has also accepted the same.

¶14

2.In view of the above petition made absolute in
terms of prayer clause (a).

¶15

3.There was an interim order passed by this Court on
13th February, 1990. It appears that an Appeal was
preferred against the said order. By order of 28th
October, 1990 the Appellate Bench of this Court directed
that the petitioners herein to pay fine at the rate of
50% of the C.I.F. Value and penalty at the rate of 20%
of the C.I.F. Value and furnish Bank Guarantee for the

¶16

balance fine and penalty as per the impugned order.
Considering the order passed the Respondents are
directed to return the amount of fine and penalty
deposited by the petitioners within six weeks from today
and similarly to return the bank guarantee duly
cancelled within six weeks from today.

¶17

4.Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to
costs.

¶18

(D.G. KARNIK, J.)(F.I. REBELLO,J.)

P.D.Singhvi v. Dr. G.K. Pillai and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.D.Singhvi v. Dr. G.K. Pillai and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Govindbhai Nayanbhai Nagar. Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Sar Gems, a Firm Vs Union of India and Ors.

West Asia Export and Import P.Ltd. Vs the Asstt.Collectors of Customs and Ors.

Shalini Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and 2 Ors.

A.B.Timbadia Vs Union of India and Ors.

Hansa Chemical Industry. Vs Asst.Collector of Customs and Anr.