Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Asian Tea & Exports Limited & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 17 May, 2019
1
33 17.05.2019
jb.
W.P. 21380(W) of 2018
+
CAN 4312 of 2019
Asian Tea & Exports Limited & Anr.
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Sunil Garg
....As the Petitioner No. 2
Affidavit of service has been filed today on behalf of the
applicants. It shows service of the CAN 4312 of 2019 on the
respondents who appeared to have acknowledged their receipt
thereof on April 22, 2019. The affidavit of service is kept on record. Today the matter is moved by the writ petitioner No. 2 in person as the applicant No. 2. The nature of the reliefs sought in the application (CAN 4312 of 2019) would grant the petitioners an important part of the remedy, which is the subject matter of the writ petition. They will be entitled to get delivery of the goods in question. Accordingly, it is only fair to hear the other side before passing the said relief at the interim stage. I note that there is no allegation contained in the said application as would persuade this Court to pass an ex parte ad interim order in the absence of the respondents/opposite parties. No case has been made out that the 2 goods are perishable in nature but the applicants have waxed lyrical about the detention charges and demurrage charges that they are having to bear. The same are not injuries which are of a nature that cannot be compensated in money. Therefore, on the face of it I am not persuaded that this is an application where any injunction far less a mandatory injunction can be granted. However, that does not restrict this Court from granting an order for release on terms. What the terms would be cannot be decided without hearing the other side. Since no notice has been served on the opposite parties that the matter would be taken up today and in view of the unfortunate circumstances where learned advocates are not appearing, it is perhaps not expected from the customs authorities to stand motionless in this Court every day without knowing when the matter would be taken up or moved. That apart Mr. Garg appearing in person as petitioner No. 2 has not obtained no objection from his recorded advocate. Therefore, I feel the interest of justice shall be sub-served if a notice is served on the respondent Nos. 2 and 4 at their Kolkata offices intimating that in the event they do not arrange for their representation before this Court on the next date appropriate directions will be passed even in their absence. 3 The matter shall appear on May 22, 2019 when the matter shall be listed as an application and taken up immediately after the 'to be mentioned' matters.
This matter will be taken up irrespective of whether learned advocates appear or any representation is made by the opposite parties.
Mr. Garg, the petitioner No. 2 is allowed to appear in person. Let photostat plain copy of the order duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be given to the petitioner No. 2 on usual undertaking.
(Protik Prakash Banrjee, J.)