The High Court of Kerala dismissed a review petition filed by an appellant in a Customs Appeal. The Court rejected the reliance on a Supreme Court judgment regarding interveners, holding that there was no error apparent on the face of the record to warrant the review.
Review petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1943
RP NO. 407 OF 2021
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN Cus.Appeal 13/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM
REVIEW PETITIONER/S:
M/S. SHRI. AMMAN DHALL MILL B-7/269/1, 2 BYE PASS ROAD, ANNANJI, THENI, TAMIL NADU 6254 531 REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR SOMASUNDARAM, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.S.SAKTHIVEL, R/O.NO.46/2269 H, APSARA BUILDING, CHAKKARAPARAMBU, ERNAKULAM 682 032
BY ADVS. P.A.AUGUSTIAN SWATHY E.S.
RESPONDENT/S:
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CUSTOMS HOUSE, WILLINGTON ISLAND, COCHIN 682 009
BY ADV M.S.AMAL DHARSAN
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.07.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P. No.407/2021
-2-
O R D E R
S.V. Bhatti, J.
The appellant in Customs Appeal No.13/2020 is the review petitioner.
were disposed of by this Court. The present review petition, as we understand and as also made clear to us by the Advocate appearing for the review petitioner, that the Supreme Court, in judgment dated 17.06.2021 in Union of India v. M/s. Raj Grow Impex LLP in paragraph no.98, has held as follows:
“The matters relating to the interveners shall also be governed by the findings of this judgment and appropriate orders in their regard shall be passed by the authorities/Courts, wherever their matters relating to the subject goods are pending but, their options of further appeal, only in relation to
R.P. No.407/2021
-3-
the quantum of amount payable, including that of penalty, is left open.”
and the review petitioner is entitled to have same consideration. The stand is taken note and we are unable to appreciate the grounds for review and review our judgment.
lines indicated above.
R.P. No.407/2021
-4-
The review petition fails and dismissed accordingly. No
order as to costs.
Sd/-
S.V.BHATTI JUDGE
Sd/BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE
jjj
R.P. No.407/2021
-5-
APPENDIX OF RP 407/2021
PETITIONER ANNEXURE Annexure I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.1.2021 IN CUS. APPEAL NO.13/2020
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a review petition should succeed on the ground that the Supreme Court in a subsequent judgment left options of further appeal, including penalty, open.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union of India v. M/s. Raj Grow Impex LLPReferred¶24
Union of India v. M/s. Raj Grow Impex LLP, judgment dated 17.06.2021
M/s. Shri. Amman Dhall Mill
Commissioner of Customs
S.V. Bhatti
Bechu Kurian Thomas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
