Allowed

M/S. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. v. the Deputy Commissioner of Customs and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC17 Jun 2016NMW/264/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court condoned the delay and allowed a Notice of Motion regarding the removal of office objections in a writ petition, restoring an earlier order, with the main petition to be admitted subsequently.

What did the court decide?

Notice of Motion made absolute restoring earlier order; Writ Petition to be placed for admission after removing objections. No further relief ordered yet.

M/S. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. Vs the Deputy… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

(908) NMW 264-16

¶2

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

¶3

Amk

¶4

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 264 OF 2016 IN

¶5

WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 797 OF 2015

¶6

M/s. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. ...Applicant

¶7

In the matter of

¶8

M/s. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. ...Petitioner

¶9

Versus

¶10

The Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Imports) & Ors.

¶11

...Respondents

¶12

Mr. Darius B. Shroff, Senior Counsel i/b Mr. Rahul Jain for the Petitioner. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly for Respondent No.1.

¶13

CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI &

¶14

DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.J.

¶15

DATE : 17th JUNE, 2016.

¶16

P.C. :

¶17

Heard Mr. Shroff, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Jetly, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1.

¶18

Perused the affidavit-in-support of this Motion. For the reasons set out therein, the delay in filing this Notice of Motion is condoned.

¶19

We find that the reasons set out in the affidavit-in-support constitute sufficient cause for the petitioner to be unable to remove the

¶20

(908) NMW 264-16

¶21

office objections. Since assurance is given that all the office objections will now be removed, we allow this Notice of Motion. The Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The order passed by this Court earlier shall stand revived and restored.

¶22

The Writ Petition to be placed for admission after verifying that all the office objections have been removed.

¶23

[DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.] [S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.]

M/S. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. v. the Deputy Commissioner of Customs and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. v. the Deputy Commissioner of Customs and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anupam Amrito Biswas, through Father Amrito Biswas Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Director of Medical and Technical Education, Mumbai and Ors.

Shri Bishwanath Jhunjhunwala and Anr. Vs Bank of Maharashtra

Mrunal Bhimrao Gaikwad through Her Natural Guardian Mr. Bhimrao Bhagwan Gaikwad Vs State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Dept. of Medical Edu. and Drugs Dept. and Ors.

Tidal Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Vs National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority and 2 Ors.

The Commissioner of Customs (Csi Airport Ii) Vs Deepti Jewellers

The Commissioner of Central Excise Large Tax Payer Unit(Ltu) Vs M/S Tata Motors Ltd.