9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MI - Seeking direction to entrust the pending litigation against the M/s. Plus Duty Free (Pvt.) Limited/1st respondent to some other officer - HELD THAT:- By preserving all the rights available to the 1st respondent against the order dated 05.04.2022 and granting liberty to the 1st respondent to work out the remedies in accordance with law within a week from today and in the interregnum the ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ameer for respondents. 2. Respondents in the W.P.(C).No.21063 of 2018 are the appellants. The learned Single Judge, through the judgment under appeal, had set aside Exts.P18 and P19 and further allowed M/s. Plus Duty Free (Pvt.) Limited to carry on its business operation. The judgment under appeal directed the second appellant to entrust the pending litigation against the M/s. Plus Duty Free (P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... listed before the Tribunal due to the non-availability of members of the Tribunal because it appears the posts are vacant. He seeks the indulgence of this Court to preserve the rights available to the 1st respondent in this Court either for moving an application for necessary interim order as the circumstances warrant for suitable reliefs. 6. We appreciate the ancillary submission made by Mr Sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd also the first respondent state that the order dated 05.04.2022 has been made by an officer in his capacity as Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) who is none other than the 6 th respondent i.e., Mr.Sumith Kumar. It is brought to our notice that the said officer is not working as Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Cochin, Ernakulam. 9. We are of the view that the conclusion recorded in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
