EASTERN STEAMSHIP PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging certain orders passed by the respondents under Section 116 of the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioners, who are a private limited company engaged in the business of agents for shopping companies, contend that the orders to be mentioned hereinafter passed by the respondents are not warranted by the provisions of Section 116 of the Customs Act and the fines which have been imposed upon them ought to be refunded.

(2.) The facts are very few and may straightaway be stated. The petitioners were acting as agents of a vessel known as M.V. LUKITA which had on board cargo for discharge at Colombo and in fact it had called at the port of Colombo. It is stated and it is not disputed that at Colombo there was a strike and after discharging part only of the cargo meant to be discharged at Colombo, m.v. LUKITA hastened back to Bombay some time in December 1969. Since it was not possible for m.v. LUKITA to return to Colombo, the Agents decided that the goods in m.v. LUKITA should be transhipped to another vessel which would then sail to Colombo.

(3.) As usual, m.v. LUKITA carried a list of the cargo with which she was sailing. Part of that cargo has been as mentioned above, discharged at Colombo and considerable part still remained on the ship when she arrived at Bombay in December 1969. The remaining cargo was discharged at Bombay, but the Master of the ship instead of delivering to the Port Authorities document correctly reflecting the cargo which was being discharged for transhipment to Colombo handed over the import manifest which included not only the cargo that was discharged at Bombay for transhipment but also the cargo which had been discharged at Colombo earlier. On a physical verification therefore it was noticed that the cargo that was actually discharged for transhipment fell short of the quantity of the cargo mentioned in the import manifest.