PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL TRADERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent petition is taken up for final hearing.

(2.) The petitioner is a foreign based company engaged inter alia in the business of trade in electronics goods. By the present petition, petitioners are seeking a direction to return and/or re-export the goods imported by them from Hong Kong which are unclaimed by the buyers. The petitioners are owners of the said goods. The goods were supplied on "consignment basis" but the buyers in India have refused to accept the goods and clear the same. The consignment arrived in India sometime during October/November, 2000. The petitioners contacted the buyers and repeatedly requested them to clean the goods but the goods were not cleared. The submission of the petitioner is that since the buyers have refused to take the consignment the petitioners as owners of the goods are entitled to the return thereof.

(3.) It is an admitted position that the bill of entry has not been filed and the buyers have virtually abandoned the goods and in fact they have taken a stand that they have not even imported the goods. In the case of Union of India v. Sampat Raj Dugar, 1992 58 ELT 163 the Supreme Court has held that if the bill of entry is not filed by the importer and the importer has abandoned the goods title in the goods will not pass to the im porter and the exporter will be entitled to re-export or return of the goods.