2023 (7) TMI 451 - HC - Customs

Seeking investigation of complaint of the petitioners against the respondent no. 6 - primary concern of the petitioners is that the goods were sold at 1/10th of the market value prevailing at the relevant time - HELD THAT - The petitioners were conscious when they made a statement as recorded in paragraph 1 of the order dated 03 December, 2018 passed on the suit that they were not interested in the goods and therefore, ad-interim relief be rejected and the said statement was made on the instructions of Mr. Joseph Parakkott, Director of the petitioners. In paragraph 4 of the said order passed in the suit, a statement on behalf of the plaintiffs also came to be recorded that the plaintiffs (petitioners) had abandoned the goods and did not wish to pursue the suit against defendant nos. 3 and 4 and that defendant nos. 3 and 4 be struck off and accordingly, defendant nos. 3 and 4, which includes defendant no. 6 on whom allegation was made, were struck off. On a perusal of the order passed on the review petition, the things do not improve as the statements which were categorically made, have subsisted and they have not been revoked only what was observed was that the statements as made were without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties - this would not in any manner support the petitioners to canvass that now investigation ought to be ordered in the sale of the goods and there is some collusion between the private respondents and officers of the customs. There are no merit in this petition - petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the petition for a Writ of Mandamus directing an investigation and action against certain respondents, and a claim for compensation due to alleged illegal conduct.

Investigation and Action:
The petitioners sought a Writ of Mandamus to direct an investigation into a complaint dated 9th November, 2020 and take action against certain respondents. The respondents referred to prior litigation where the petitioners had abandoned goods and did not wish to pursue the suit against certain defendants. The court noted that the petitioners were conscious when making statements in the prior proceedings and found no grounds to support ordering an investigation based on alleged collusion between private respondents and customs officers. The court rejected the petition as it found no merit in the request for investigation.

Claim for Compensation:
The petitioners also sought a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay compensation for losses allegedly caused by illegal conduct. The court's decision was based on the petitioners' prior actions and statements in the earlier proceedings where they abandoned goods and did not pursue the suit against certain defendants. The court found that the petitioners had already taken a position resulting in the goods being sold, and therefore, rejected the claim for compensation. No costs were awarded in this matter.