The Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that it cannot decide a dispute between private parties regarding the release of goods already cleared by Customs. The petitioner was granted liberty to avail civil remedies.
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.
W.P.(MD).No.13446 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.11.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
W.P.(MD).No.13446 of 2024
M/s.SGS Mills, Represented by its Proprietor, Latha
...Petitioner
Vs
... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to ensure the demuurage waiver certificate
1/6
W.P.(MD).No.13446 of 2024
dated 20.05.2024 issued by the first respondent is complied by the third and fourth respondents and consequently direct the third and fourth respondents to release the goods covered by the bill of entry No.2961336 dated 10.04.2024 is released to the petitioner without imposition of any detention charges.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthumalai Raja
For R-1 and R-2 : Mr.R.Nandha Kumar Senior Standing Counsel For R-3 : Mr.Lloyd and Johnson
O R D E R
Heard Mr.S.Muthumalai Raja, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.R.Nandha Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.Lloyd and Johnson, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent.
directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to ensure the demuurage waiver certificate dated 20.05.2024 issued by the first respondent is complied with by the third and fourth respondents and consequently to direct the third and fourth respondents to release the goods covered by the bill of
2/6
W.P.(MD).No.13446 of 2024
entry No.2961336 dated 10.04.2024 is released to the petitioner without imposition of any detention charges.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had imported cotton rags through the third and fourth respondents which was subject to detention by the Customs Department and an order of release was passed by the Customs Department on 14.05.2024 which also entitles not to claim demurrage charges for a period of 60 days from the date of order of release. However, the third and fourth respondents are refusing to release the goods in favour of the petitioner. Hence, he had approached this Court to extend the benefit of demurrage waiver to the petitioner and also direct the third and fourth respondents to release the goods which had been released by the department.
4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that as per the rules, for the goods that had been detained by the Department for verification, if an order of release had been made, then for the further period of 60 days, no demurrage charges would be levied and for the period after 60 days, demurrage charges would be levied and either the petitioner or the
3/6
W.P.(MD).No.13446 of 2024
respondents 3 and 4 are liable to pay such demurrage charges to the Department.
5. The learned counsel for the third respondent on the other hand would contend that goods could be released to the petitioner only on fulfillment of terms and contract that had been agreed between the parties and this Writ Petition cannot be said to be maintainable for relief against the third and fourth respondents for release of goods covered under the bill of entry. He would further submit that if for any relief, the petitioner would have to only exhaust alternate remedy available to him and therefore, he prays this Court not to entertain this Writ Petition.
6. Admittedly, the detained goods had been released by the Customs Department and in view of the dispute between the petitioner and the respondents 3 and 4, arising out of contract for carriage agency, the goods were not released. This Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution, cannot decide the dispute between two private parties and direct the release of goods which has already been released by the Customs Department. However, the petitioner is grated liberty to avail civil remedy available to him.
W.P.(MD).No.13446 of 2024
7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed with the above
liberty. There shall be no order as to costs.
27.11.2024
NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no Nsr
To:
5/6
W.P.(MD).No.13446 of 2024
K.KUMARESH BABU, J.
Nsr
W.P.(MD).No.13446 of 2024
27.11.2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can direct private parties to release goods that have already been released by the Customs Department?
M/s.SGS Mills
The Commissioner of Customs
The Superintendent of Customs
M/s.Goodrich Maritime Private Limited
M/s.Vilson Container Freight Station
K.KUMARESH BABU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
