K K INDUSTRIES Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The factual matrix of the case is that the plaintiff sent a parcel of goods duly paid to Bahrain, a foreign country. It was not accepted by the addressee. The postal authorities asked for Rs. 24,102/- as postage charges as the parcel was received back. The plaintiff paid the same and requested the authorities to re-export the same to Jeddah but the same was not re-forwarded as it was detained by the C.B.I. at Bombay. The customs department is alleged to have levied customs duty charges which is said to be the amount of draw back amount paid at the time of exporting the parcel. The Postmaster General, Ambala, vide his order dated 8.4.1982 ordered for the recovery of the amount alleged to have been imposed by the Customs Department and having been paid to the department as book entry. The correspondence was exchanged. The department claimed the amount under Section 12 of the Post Office Act , 1898. The Postal Department sent the recovery to the Revenue authorities for recovering the amount as arrears of land revenue.

(2.) The plaintiff challenged the said recovery inter-alia contending that the order dated 8.4.1982 is a void order having been passed adverse to the plaintiff without granting any opportunity of being heard and without prior notice to him. It was further averred that the Postal authorities had no jurisdiction to recover the amount under the certificate. The recovery being without jurisdiction, the respondent sought an injunction restraining the defendant from effecting the recovery as arrears of land revenue.

(3.) The allegations were controverted. The defendants contended that there was no valid service of notice under Section 80, Civil Procedure Code. The suit was not maintainable under Section 78 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act read with Section 158 of the Act. The plaintiff could only maintain the suit for recovery of the amount after the same was paid in terms of Section 78 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act. The suit was stated to be barred by time. It was contended that the plaintiff had filed a civil case in Bombay wherein a direction was issued for the release of the parcel and its return to the sender after levying of customs duty charges (These charges were admitted to be the amount of draw back money i.e. the amount paid to the plaintiff at the time of exporting the parcel). The order dated 8.4.1982 of the Postmaster General was said to be within jurisdiction, legal and valid. It was averred that plaintiff never objected to the payment of customs duty inspite of various notices issued and the postal department was entitled to recover the amount under Section, 12 of the Post Office Act .