ALLAHABAD BANK Vs. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By order dated November 28, 1989, this Court appointed a Special Officer as suggested and agreed by the learned lawyers of the respective parties for the purpose of Auction Sale of goods in question otherwise the goods are likely to be damaged. The goods have been sold and the sale proceeds are lying with the Bank and an application has since been filed by the purchaser. There was a direction upon the Special Officer to cause public advertisement in two daily newspapers namely, "The Statesman" and "The Ananda Bazar Patrika" and to hold auction by inviting sealed bids. Pursuant thereto such direction, the Special Officer caused public advertisement as indicated above and several intending purchasers participated at the auction sale. M/s. Bagabati Steel Centre of 23, Netaji Subhas Road became the successful bidder. They had deposited the consideration and took delivery of the goods on 7th August, 1990. An application has since been filed by the said third party purchaser that as per the sale notice the entire goods were not made available and there is a prayer for refund of a portion of the consideration of pro rata basis. Copy of the said application has been served upon the Bank Authority, Customs Authority and Income-tax Authority. The Special Officer has since filed his report.

(2.) Having heard the learned lawyers for the respective parties and in view of the report of the special officer, it appears that on April 24, 1990, sealed covers were opened in court by the Special Officer and the names of the hidders and the prices offered were mentioned. The petitioner was the highest bidder and quoted the price at the rate of Rs. 11,901.00 per Metric Tonne aggregating to Rs. 21,06,470.00 in terms of the newspapers advertisement. The highest offer was accepted and the Special Officer was directed to sell the subject goods to the petitioner upon receipt of the balance sale price. On 7th May, 1990, the special officer filed his report. It has been placed on record that the special officer will cause delivery of 41 packets of varying weights of C.R. Coil weighing 169.180 Metric Tonnes in aggregate as per the advertisement in the newspapers. The special officer actually offered to sell 177 M.T. of C.R. Coils. As recorded in the order dated April 24, 1990, the petitioner offered to pay a total sum of Rs. 21,06,470.00 at the rate of Rs. 11,901.00 per metric tonne. It is pointed out that 41 coils contained 30 kgs. of packing materials and there has been a short delivery to the tune of 9.020 metric tonnes of C.R. Coils to the petitioner. The relevant weighment certificates and the road challans issued by the special officer have been referred. Considering all the aspects, this Court finds that there is merit in the contention of the third party purchaser that there was a short delivery of the quantity as claimed. The petitioner's claims should amount to Rs. 93,065.82 P. and the packaging materials amount to Rs. 14,638.23P. The petitioner can ask for refund of the said amount but the claim of interest at the rate of 24% appears to be thoroughly mis-conceived. The petitioner with his eyes open purchased the materials. There is also price hike and there will be unnecessary enrichment and the claim for the interest cannot be entertained.

(3.) For the ends of justice and for the fitness of things, the petitioner is entitled to refund of Rs. 1,07,704.05 P. The Special Officer is directed to take steps for causing refund of the said amount to the third party purchaser. The application is thus disposed of accordingly.