Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

26. It is also contended that, the defendant no. 2 is not a member of the Federation of Freight Forwarders Association of India and therefore it is misconceived to allege that the "Standard Trading Conditions of Freight Forwarders" would be applicable to the defendant no. 2. Moreover the said conditions were never agreed upon between the defendant no. 3 and the defendant no. 2. Finally, it is submitted that even under the said rules, the defendant no. 3 shall have no right of lien and detention of the said consignment of goods which were unrelated to the transactions with the plaintiff.

Right of "lien" claimed by the Defendant no.3

60. Two contentions are raised by the learned senior counsel for the defendant no.3 found in support of the alleged right of the defendant no. 3 to exercise lien in respect of the consignment in question. Firstly, it is contended that the "Standard Trading Conditions for the Freight Forwarders" as framed by the Federation of Freight Forwarders Association in India, which find a reference in the invoice raised by the defendant no.3 upon the defendant no. 2, enables the defendant no.3 to exercise/claim a lien with respect to the goods in question.

64. Ex facie, the aforesaid "Standard Trading Conditions for Freight Forwarders" cannot apply in a situation where the goods of a third party come into the hands of a Freight Forwarder in his capacity as such agent of another Freight Forwarder (defendant no.2). The untenability of the contentions of the defendant no.3 is evident from the absurd consequences that would entail if the so-called Standard Trading of Federation Forwarders were made applicable to the parties such as the plaintiff who are not Freight Forwarders, who have no privity of contract with sub-agents of the Freight Forwarders engaged by it and in whose hands the goods have come only for the purpose of making arrangements for transportation of the concerned goods to the ultimate consignee in question.

73. Thus, it is only with respect to the category of persons specified in Section 171 that it is permissible to retain goods bailed to them as security and exercise a "general lien" in respect thereof.

74. The matter is put beyond the pale of doubt by a judgment of the Bombay High Court in Anax Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Micro Logistics (I), Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai13, where the High Court of Bombay specifically dealt with the right of lien sought to be exercised by a freight forwarding agent. As a result of the lien sought to be exercised in that case, the plaintiff therein was compelled to pray for a mandatory injunction seeking release of bills of lading illegally withheld by the freight forward agent. The Bombay High Court after taking note of Section 170 and 171 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, and the judgment of the Supreme Court in Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay and Others v. Sriyanesh Knitters (supra) held as under: