LAWS(ALL)-1957-1-1

UNION OF INDIA UOI Vs. BHAGWAN INDUSTRIES LTD

Decided On January 29, 1957
UNION OF INDIA (UOI) Appellant
V/S
BHAGWAN INDUSTRIES LTD. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a first appeal arising out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-respondent for the recovery of Rs. 8,182/12/- due by the appellant on account of customs duties paid in advance for the export of goods out of India. It appears that the plaintiff dealt in mustard oil and wanted to export 1870 maunds of mustard oil to East Pakistan via "Katihar. Under the rules a permit for export is issued only after a person desirous of exporting goods deposits the export duty payable on the commodity sought to be exported in advance. The plaintiff deposited Rs. 10,990/14/- at Purnea in advance, as this was the amount of duty which would have been payable on 1870 maunds of mustard oil sought to be transported. The plaintiff then tried to get wagons for transport of oil but only two wagons could with difficulty be had and he was able to export only 513 maunds and 6 seers of mustard oil and after deducting the export duty on this amount of oil a sum of Rs. 8,182/12/- remained in deposit with the defendant-appellant. The plaintiff then sent letters to the officers of the Customs Department for the repayment of this excess amount. There was a protracted correspondence till ultimately the plaintiff was told that the duty could not be refunded in view of the provisions of Section 40 of the Sea Customs Act. The plaintiff then gave the statutory notice of two months to the Union of India and filed the suit which has given rise to this appeal for recovery of Rs. 8,182/12/-.

(2.) The suit was contested by the defendant on three main grounds. Firstly, it was alleged that the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of Purnea Court and the Court below had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The second contention was that the suit was barred by time and the third and last contention was that the duty was not refundable in view of the provisions of Section 40 of the Sea Customs Act.

(3.) The lower Court found in favour of the plaintiff on all these three points and decreed the claim. The defendant has now come up in appeal.