9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 80X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld not be enforced against them for recovery of any penalty imposed not on them but a crew member, they executed the bond. In view of this, the respondents are not entitled to recover the amount of penalty imposed on the Second Officer Mr. Aleksandr from the petitioners on the basis of a bond – Held that - the petitioners are entitled to the refund of the money so deposited together with interest, if any, accrued if the money has been invested - 1983 OF 1992 - - - Dated:- 13-8-2009 - <?xml:namespace prefix = st2 /> FERDINO I. REBELLO D.G. KARNIK, JJ. Mr. D.C. Gomes for the Petitioner. Mr. P.S. Jetly with Mr. Rohit B. Pardeshi for the respondents. [Judgment Per D.G. Karnik, J.]. - By this petition, the pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Yogorov Aleksandr, the Second Officer who was alleged to have put the silver bars on board, to show cause why the vessel should not be confiscated under section 115(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short "the Act") and why the contraband silver bars be not confiscated under section 111(d) of the Act. After the usual hearing, by an order dated 15th July 1992 the Collector of Customs ordered confiscation of the contraband silver bars and imposed a personal penalty of Rs.5,00,000/on Mr. Aleksandr, the Second Officer under section 112(1)(i) of the Act. The Collector, however, held that the vessel was not liable for confiscation under section 115 of the Act and ordered its release to the owners, i.e. principles of the petitioners. The Collector ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Second Officer. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents however submitted that the respondents were entitled to recover the penalty from the petitioners on the basis of the bond given by them for release of the ship. Reliance is placed on clause (e) of the bond which reads as under: "(e) THE OBLIGOR (i.e. the petitioner) shall pay the fine, penalty and/or other incidental charges, if any, imposed on and/or due from them or any crew member under the order in adjudication passed by the said Collector of Customs in the subject proceedings." Counsel for the respondents submitted that the bond was an independent contract entered into by the petitioners with the Customs Authorities and they are liable under the bond to pay the penalty. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Customs Authorities had secured the bond of the ship owners, it would not be appropriate to provide for recovery from the owners of fine or penalty imposed on any crew member under the adjudication proceedings if the contraband articles were brought on the ship without the knowledge or connivance of owner or the Master of the ship in spite of reasonable precaution taken by them. In our view, in the present case, without going into the contention of the petitioners that the bond was obtained from them by force for securing the liability for payment of penalty, if any, imposed on the crew member for bringing in the goods without the knowledge and connivance of the Master or owner of the ship, the petition would have to be allowed followin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
