Allowed

M/S.Trans Asian Shipping v. the Chairman

Madras HC13 Feb 2020WP/11020/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, in a writ petition seeking a mandate under Article 226 of the Constitution, directed the Tariff Authority for Major Ports (1st Respondent) to dispose of a pending appeal filed by the petitioner within twelve weeks, following an inquiry and opportunity for hearing. The writ petition was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 1st Respondent to dispose of the pending appeal within twelve weeks, after affording opportunity to both parties.

M/S.Trans Asian Shipping Vs the Chairman — Company and Corporate | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 13.02.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶5

W.P. No.11020 of 2012

¶6

M/s.Trans Asian Shipping Services (P) Ltd. Rep. by its Branch Manager, EVS Tower, 2nd Floor, No.21, Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. ... Petitioner Vs

¶7

The Chairman,

¶8

The Tariff Authority for Major Ports, IV Floor, Bhandar Bhavan, Mazgaon, Mumbai - 400 010.

¶9

The Chennai Container Terminal (P) Ltd., Chennai Port Trust, Administrative Building, 2nd Floor, Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001.

¶10

The Joint Commissioner of Customs, Office of the Commissioner of Customs, No.1, Williams Road, Tiruchirapalli.

¶11

The Chairman, Chennai Port Trust, Chennai. ... Respondents

¶12

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to consider the Appeal dated 16.06.2011 filed by the Petitioner-company and pass appropriate orders within a time-limit as fixed by this Court after affording full and fair opportunity to the Petitioner company.

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.W.M.Abdul Majeed

¶15

For Respondents

¶16

: R1 -Served - No appearance

¶17

Mr.S.Raghunathan for R2

¶18

Mr.E.Vijay Anand for R3 -

¶19

No appearance

¶20

Mr.M.Devendran for R4

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This writ petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to dispose of the appeal dated 16.06.2011 within a time frame to be fixed by this Court after affording full and fair opportunity to the petitioner.

¶23

It is the case of the petitioner that certain goods which were found in the Container belonging to the petitioner were confiscated by the third respondent on 14.02.2007.

¶24

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of the container and not the confiscated goods. According to them, they are not liable to pay any port storage charges for the period during which the container was confiscated and lying at the port premises. According to the petitioner, the impugned demand issued by the second respondent is arbitrary and illegal. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the first respondent, which is still pending on its file. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for a Mandamus to direct the first respondent to dispose of the appeal within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶25

Heard Mr.W.M.Abdul Majeed, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.S.Raghunathan, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and Mr.M.Devendran, learned counsel for the 4th respondent.

¶26

Admittedly, the appeal filed by the petitioner before the first respondent is still pending. The only relief sought for by the petitioner in this writ petition is for a direction to dispose of the appeal pending before the first respondent within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶27

The relief sought for by the petitioner will not prejudice the interest of any of the parties to this writ petition. Therefore, this Court is inclined to grant the said relief.

¶28

Accordingly, this Court directs the first respondent to dispose of the appeal dated 16.06.2011, filed by the petitioner

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶30

and pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording sufficient opportunity to both the petitioner as well as other parties to the appeal including granting them the right of personal hearing.

¶31

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

Assistant Registrar(CS-V)

¶34

//True copy//

¶35

Sub Assistant Registrar
vsi2
To
1. The Chairman,
The Tariff Authority for Major Ports,
IV Floor, Bhandar Bhavan,
Mazgaon,
Mumbai - 400 010.
2. The Chennai Container Terminal (P) Ltd.,
Chennai Port Trust,
Administrative Building,
2nd Floor,
Rajaji Salai,
Chennai - 600 001.
3. The Joint Commissioner of Customs,
Office of the Commissioner of Customs,
No.1, Williams Road,
Tiruchirapalli.
4. The Chairman,
Chennai Port Trust,
Chennai.
+1cc to Mr.W.M.Abdul Majeed, Advocate SR.No.12167
+2cc to Mr.M.Devendran, Advocate SR.No.11674
BP(CO)
GMY(21/05/2020)

¶36

W.P. No.11020 of 2012

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/S.Trans Asian Shipping v. the Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Trans Asian Shipping v. the Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.P.Ellappan Vs The Zonal Manager

Mr.P.G.Shanmugam, Vs State of Tamilnadu

K.M.Shanmugam, Lot NO.6692, Vs Director of School Education

V.Rathinachinnaiah Vs the Commissioner of Sugar

T.S.Dhakshinamurthy Vs the Director General of

M/S Sterling Decors Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Presiding Officer