9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 358X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice sent to the petitioner was returned with the endorsement left . Even though it is the case of the respondent that the address was given only by the petitioner's agent, the said communication of the agent disclosing the petitioner's address has not been reflected in the impugned order dated 06.11.2014. By a single paragraph cryptic order, without any discussion with regard to the service of notice and with regard to the liability of the petitioner to pay penal demurrage charges, the impugned order has been passed by total non application of mind and has also been passed without adhering to the directions issued by a learned single judge of this Court. This Court is of the considered view that arbitrarily without affording ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner to approach the respondents by way of a fresh representation pointing out the circumstances under which they were prevented from removing the cargo with documentary evidence and the respondents were directed to consider the representation on merits and in accordance with law after giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner in the said enquiry proceedings. Pursuant to the order dated 27.03.2014 passed in W.P.Nos.28110/2010 and 28111/2010, the respondent has passed the impugned order dated 06.11.2014 holding that the levy of penal demurrage charges on the petitioner is in order and does not call for any interference. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition has been filed. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with regard to the claim of the penal demurrage charges was returned with the endorsement left . According to him, the address mentioned in the notice is the correct address of the petitioner as declared by the agent of the petitioner. 7. This Court has perused and examined the impugned order dated 06.11.2014, which has been passed pursuant to the order dated 27.03.2014 passed by a learned single judge of this Court in W.P.Nos.28110 of 2010 and 28111 of 2010. 8. The impugned order reads as follows: After extensive perusal of your counsel's oral and written submissions and the position of the Trust, it is informed that as per the Trust's Rules and procedures, the notice was sent to the official address, as furnished in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and with regard to the liability of the petitioner to pay penal demurrage charges, the impugned order has been passed by total non application of mind and has also been passed without adhering to the directions issued by a learned single judge of this Court on 27.03.2014 in W.P.Nos.28110 of 2010 and 28111 of 2010. 10. For the forgoing reasons, this Court is of the considered view that arbitrarily without affording a fair hearing to the petitioner, the respondent has passed the impugned order confirming the levy of penal demurrage charges on the petitioner. 11. In the result, the impugned order dated 06.11.2014 is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for fresh consideration and the respondent is directed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
