Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Charminar Rollers vs the Additional Commissioner of Customs(Siib)

Charminar Rollers vs The Additional Commissioner of Customs(Siib)

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jul 25, 2025
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1760930

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP/4468/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Charminar Rollers

Respondent

The Additional Commissioner of Customs(Siib)

Excerpt

the high court of judicature at madras dated: 25.07.2025coram:the hon'ble mr. justice abdul quddhose and m/s.charminar rollers, rep. by its authorised signatory s. madhukumar ... petitioner in -vs- chennai - 600 001. ... respondents in prayer in w.p. no.4468 of 2025: writ petition filed article 226 of the constitution of india, for writ of certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned communication, dated 01.08.2024 in file no.gen/inv/dr/123/2024-siib o/o. issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same.prayer in w.p. no.4471 of 2025: writ petition filed article 226 of the constitution of india, for writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned communication, dated 26.11.2024 in file no.gen/inv/dr/123/2024-siib issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and further, directing the 1st respondent and 2nd respondent to issue any letter for waiver of detention and demurrage charges with respect to the bills of entry nos.3404892, dated 09.05.2024 and 3557871, dated 19.05.2024.for petitioner in both w.p.s : ms.m. punnagai for mr.hari radhakrishnan for respondents in both w.p.s: mr.rajnish pathiyil senior panel counsel ------common orderthe learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in both writ petitions submits that the prayer sought for in these writ petitions have now become infructuous. she has also made an endorsement to that effect in the court bundle.2. in view of the above endorsement made by the learned counselfor the petitioner, both these writ petitions are dismissed as infructuous. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. internet:yes/no index:yes/nospeaking/non-speaking orderneutral citation : yes/no toabdul quddhose, j.and

Full Judgment

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.07.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and M/s.Charminar Rollers, Rep. by its Authorised Signatory S. Madhukumar ... Petitioner in -Vs- Chennai - 600 001. ... Respondents in Prayer in W.P. No.4468 of 2025: Writ Petition filed Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned communication, dated 01.08.2024 in File No.GEN/Inv/DR/123/2024-SIIB O/o. issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same.

Prayer in W.P. No.4471 of 2025: Writ Petition filed Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned communication, dated 26.11.2024 in File No.GEN/INV/DR/123/2024-SIIB issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and further, directing the 1st respondent and 2nd respondent to issue any letter for waiver of detention and demurrage charges with respect to the Bills of Entry Nos.3404892, dated 09.05.2024 and 3557871, dated 19.05.2024.

For Petitioner in both W.P.s : Ms.M. Punnagai for Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan For Respondents in both W.P.s: Mr.Rajnish Pathiyil Senior Panel Counsel ------

COMMON ORDER

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in both Writ Petitions submits that the prayer sought for in these Writ Petitions have now become infructuous. She has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle.

2. In view of the above endorsement made by the learned counsel

for the petitioner, both these Writ Petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation : Yes/No To

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

and

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial