UNION OF INDIA Vs. RUCHITA ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH the consent of Mr. R. Thyagarajan, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-caveator, the writ appeal itself which is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 18400 of 1990, dated 31-1-1991 is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) IN the view that we are taking, it is not necessary to advert to the detailed facts of the case. The learned single Judge directed the release of the goods to the respondent in the following terms :

(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, we modify the order of the learned single Judge to the effect that the respondent shall be issued with the detention certificate in accordance with law on the application made by the respondent, and the release of the goods shall be made, on the respondent paying one-third of the total amount of eight lakhs of rupees in cash and on furnishing bank guarantee for the balance of two-thirds of amount. So far as the differential duty is concerned, the respondent shall again pay one-third of the amount in cash and furnish bank guarantee for the balance of two-thirds of the amount. The question of waiver of deposit shall be considered by the appellate authority who shall decide the appeal, as and when filed, uninfluenced by any of the observations of the learned single Judge made in the writ petition. We would also like to observe that the appellants, in case they are aggrieved of orders, should take expeditious steps to question them, as the delay in questioning such orders may result in financial hardship, as has been projected by Mr. R. Thyagarajan appearing for the respondent-caveator, by way of accrual of demurrage.