9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 393X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the levy of charges by the Port Trust on a consignment of logs lying within the docks is impugned. 3. The Single Judge was moved with an application for interim relief. By an order dated 21 September, 2020, the Single Judge directed that the first and second respondents shall pay an amount of Rs. 25 lakhs to the appellants upon which the Port Authorities shall allow the removal of 50% of the cargo lying within the dock premises, subject to the first and second respondents complying with statutory formalities. The order of the Single Judge noted that the original petitioners imported 737 pieces of wooden logs admeasuring about 3395.625 metric tons which arrived at Kolkata Port on 19 March, 2020. The goods have been stored in an area ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch, in fact, places the Port Trust (which was in appeal) in a position which is worse off than under the interim order of the Single Judge. Further, it has been submitted that the licensee of the Port Trust is the third respondent, Alap Carriers, which is alleged to have encroached upon an area larger than what was licensed and it would not be open to the first and second respondents, who have no privity with the Port Authorities, to assert any claim on behalf of the third respondent. Mr. Rohatgi submits that the Circulars of the Ministry of Shipping speak of a deferment (and not a waiver) of port charges. 6. On the other hand, Mr. Siddharth Dave, Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the first and second respondents, submits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he cargo against a payment of Rs. 25 lakhs. The Division Bench in appeal directed the release of the entire cargo against a payment of Rs. 50 lakhs, placing the Port Trust in a position which is worse off than under the interim order. We are hence constrained to interfere with the order of the Division Bench, though it arises in interlocutory proceedings because of the evident error. The Division Bench has ignored the statute, the binding precedents of this Court and acted contrary to judicial norms. 8. The real issue in contest in the writ petition turns upon the interpretation of the Circulars of the Ministry of Shipping. This needs to be resolved by the High Court. During the course of the hearing, we have indicated to the Learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... second respondents are entitled to any remission or waiver in terms of the Circulars of the Ministry of Shipping will be decided in the course of the hearing of the writ petition. If they succeed, consequential directions for refund with interest can follow. On the other hand, if the goods are allowed to be cleared without the payment of port dues, the interests of the Port Trust would not be secured. Hence we are of the view that it would be appropriate to subject the first and second respondents to an order for the payment of the dues which are claimed by the Port Trust, without prejudice to the contentions in the petition pending before the High Court. 10. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi stated that the dues of the Port Trust amount to Rs. 1.35 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
