Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Raj Growimpex Llp vs Sudhir Kumar Singh & Ors on 13 June, 2019
Author: I.P. Mukerji
Bench: I.P. Mukerji
1
04 13.6.19
W.P. 9614(W) of 2009
with
M.A.T 800 of 2019
With
CAN 5052 of 2019
Raj Growimpex LLP
Vs.
Sudhir Kumar Singh & Ors.
Mr. Arijit Chakraborty
Mr. S. Mishra
Mr. P. Bera .... For the Appellant.
Mr. Somnath Ganguly
Ms. S. Gupta ... For the Respondent NO. 2.
Mr. Mainak Bose Mr. S.M. Akhtar ... For the Respondent.
This is an appeal from a judgement and order dated 30th May, 2019 passed by a learned single judge of this court in W.P. 9614(W) of 2019 (Sudhdir Kumar Singh Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata & Ors.) We admit the appeal.
By consent of learned counsel for the parties, we have heard out the appeal today itself dispensing with all formalities.
The objection of the appellant to the impugned S.D. order, principally, is that it was passed without notice to them and without service of a copy of the writ petition.
This is a purely technical point. If it succeeds 2 the matter would have to be remanded to the trial Court for fresh adjudication which would consume a significant amount of time.
Mr. Bose, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 submits that the goods are perishable. He also submits that a copy of the writ petition has been already served on 28th May, 2019 on the appellant, Mr. Chakraborty's client.
All of the papers are before this court. Hence, considering all these factors we thought it prudent to dispose of the appeal today.
The dispute between the appellant and the first respondent is with regard to the title of the imported consignment of Russian Whole Yellow Peas.
Each of the said two parties claim title over the goods.
Mr. Bose learned counsel for the first respondent submits that the original bill of lading is with his client and available in court for production.
Mr. Chakraborty on the other hand says that he will be able to produce documents to show his client's title over the goods.
We shall not enter into the controversy. It is for 3 the customs authority, to satisfy itself with regard to the documents filed with them by the importer for taking a decision on the clearance of the goods for home consumption.
Accordingly, we direct the Customs Authority to decide on the question of home clearance of the subject goods upon giving an opportunity to the appellant and the first respondent to produce documents and to be heard. Since the goods are perishable the said authority will pronounce its decision within ten working days of service of this order.
The impugned order dated 30th May, 2019 is superseded by this order.
As the containers are incurring a large amount of rent, liberty is given to the first respondent to destuff the containers, in the presence of the Customs and the appellant and to store the said goods in a public or private warehouse according to availability, also in the presence of the said parties immediately. All costs and charges for this exercise will be borne by the first respondent.
As affidavits were not invited, the allegations in the stay application and in the writ petition are deemed 4 not to have been admitted.
Nothing remains of the writ application (W.P. 9614(W) of 2019). It is treated as on the day's list. This appeal MAT 800 of 2019 the application C.A.N. 5052 of 2019 and the writ application W.P. 9614(W) of 2019 are disposed of.
(I.P. Mukerji, J.) (Md. Nizamuddin, J.)