Bombay High Court
Sachee Agro Trading Pvt. Ltd vs Union Of India (Through The Secretary) ... on 16 June, 2021
Bench: Sunil P. Deshmukh, G. S. Kulkarni
29.WPL10023_2021.docx
Vidya Amin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO. 10023 OF 2021
Sachee Agro Trading Pvt. Ltd. ... Petitioner
vs.
Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents
Dr. Sujay Kantawala, Mr. Anupan Dighe a/w. Chandni Tanna, Shrushti
Relekar i/b. India Law Alliance for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Singh, ASG a/w. Mr.Aditya Thakkar, Mr. D.P. Singh for
respondent no. 1-UOI.
Mr. Jitendra B. Mishra a/w. Mr. Satyaprakash Sharma for respondent
nos. 2 to 5.
CORAM :- SUNIL P. DESHMUKH &
G. S. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATE :- JUNE 16, 2021 PC :
1. This petition was listed for hearing yesterday on a praecipe as moved on behalf of the petitioner, as it was informed that respondent no. 6 is likely to proceed to auction the goods for non-payment of charges. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record an affidavit of service proving service on respondent no. 6. It appears that despite receipt of notice, respondent no. 6 is not inclined to appear in the present proceedings.
2. Accordingly, we have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the revenue. Both the learned counsel have 1/2 ::: Uploaded on - 17/06/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2021 22:19:57 :::
29.WPL10023_2021.docx informed that a substantive prayer in prayer clause (a)(i) & (ii) stands worked out, as permission is granted for amendment in the IGM No. 2274981 dated 13th February, 2021, as requested by the petitioner in application dated 30th April, 2021.
3. In view of such amendment being permitted, nothing survives for adjudication on these prayers. The petitioner is now intending to clear the goods by following the legal procedure. The petition, therefore, can be conveniently disposed of keeping open all other contentions of the petitioner in regard to the clearance of goods.
4. However, in these circumstances, as noted by us in paragraph 1, we would be required to protect the interest of the petitioner by directing respondent no. 6 not to take any further action to auction the goods in question, keeping open the contentions of respondent no. 6 in regard to recovery of any charges/fees as also the contentions of the petitioner in that regard. Ordered accordingly.
5. Disposed of in the above terms. No costs.
(G. S. KULKARNI, J.) (SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.) 2/2 ::: Uploaded on - 17/06/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2021 22:19:57 :::