Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 1986 (11) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1986 (11) TMI 281 - HC - Customs

Issues:
Contempt of court for non-compliance with court orders regarding revalidation of import license.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a notice of motion for contempt of court against the Union of India and an individual, the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports. The original court order by Pratap J. directed the revalidation of the petitioners' import license for a specific period and endorsed it for the import of certain items under the AM 83 Policy. The respondents appealed against this order, but the appeal was dismissed by a Division Bench of the court and later by the Supreme Court. Despite the dismissal of the appeal, the respondents did not comply with the original court order until the date of the Supreme Court's decision.

During the proceedings, it was revealed that the respondents had endorsed the petitioners' license with an additional clause not specified in the original order by Pratap J. This additional clause restricted the import of certain items, thereby diluting the relief granted by the court. The judgment highlighted that the respondents failed to obtain permission from the Supreme Court to include this clause, leading to non-compliance with the court order. The court deemed this act as contempt of court, emphasizing the importance of respecting court orders, especially by government entities like the Union of India.

Consequently, the court found the Union of India and the individual, the former Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, guilty of contempt of court. The Union of India was fined Rs. 2,000, and the individual was sentenced to four weeks of simple imprisonment. The court emphasized that the contempt was a continuing offense until the petitioners' license was endorsed exactly as per the original court order. Additionally, the court directed the Ministry of Law and Company Affairs to notify the Commerce Ministry of the Union of India about the judgment. The respondents were also ordered to pay the petitioners' costs for the motion, and the application for a stay was refused.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates