UNION OF INDIA Vs. GODREJ INDUSTRIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for hearing and heard forthwith.

(2.) A learned Judge of this Court on 22nd July, 2005 was pleased to pass a judgment against the appellants and in favour of the respondents under Order 8, rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. A few facts may be set out which will be necessary for the purpose of considering the appeal. It was the case of the respondents that the appellants under the provisions of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the Exports (Control) Order 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the Order) granted cash compensatory support to exporters for exporting certain items. One of such item was of Deoiled rice Bran which the Respondents exported between the period 1st April, 1977 till 31st March, 1978. The exports were subject to certain terms and conditions. The respondents contend that the appellants informed the S. E. A. and through it, its members which included the respondent that Cash Compensatory support Scheme would continue for a period of 3 years ending on 31st March, 1982. The respondents therefore, undertook the programme of long term exports of Deoiled Rice Bran. They invested in additional equipments apart from other expenses. The appellants had promised that the Cash Compensatory Support scheme on exports of De-oiled Rice Bran would continue without any reservation for the period from 1st April, 1979 to 31st March, 1982. However by subsequent letter dated 2nd April, 1979 purported to reserve a right to review the scheme of cash assistance unconditionally sanctioned by the said letter dated 10th January, 1979 and to reduce or withdraw the same at any time. The cash compensatory support was abruptly discontinued with effect from 1st April, 1981 without assigning any reason. The respondents exported between the period from 1st April, 1981 to 31st March, 1982. As they were not paid cash compensatory support for the loss the suit was filed for damages amounting to Rs. 22,07,034/-along with interest at the rate of 21% per annum.

(3.) At the hearing of this appeal on behalf of the appellants their learned counsel firstly contends as under :-