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.

Collector of Customs and ors. Vs. Vijayaraj and anr.

Collector of Customs and ors. vs Vijayaraj and anr.

Disposition Appeal dismissed Court Chennai Decided Feb 21, 1991
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/815137

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 High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Writ Appeal No. 164 of 1991
Subject
Customs
Disposition
Appeal dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Re-export - Customs--Mis-declaration of goods and failure to unload as per import general manifest--Department admitting that no contraband was carried--Rejection of request for re-export--Not justified--Writ petition against such rejection--Single Judge directing Department to allow re-export of goods subject to pe...

Key legal issue
Customs
Outcome / disposition
Appeal dismissed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Collector of Customs and ors.

Respondent

Vijayaraj and anr.

Legal References

Reported In
1993(44)ECC280

Excerpt

re-export - customs--mis-declaration of goods and failure to unload as per import general manifest--department admitting that no contraband was carried--rejection of request for re-export--not justified--writ petition against such rejection--single judge directing department to allow re-export of goods subject to petitioner giving undertaking and bond to be bound by final adjudication subject to legal remedies against department--department at liberty to initiate and complete action under customs act--proper--customs act (52 of 1962), sections 69(1), 111(d), 116 - imports and exports (control) act (18 of 1947), section 3(2). - nainarsundaram, j.1. the very counter affidavit of the appellants declared that the container did not contain any contraband or prohibited goods. the only allegation on the part of the appellants is a mis-declaration of the goods and failure to unload the goods as per the import general manifest. in the said circumstances, the learned single judge rightly held that there is no hurdle in directing re-export of the goods as asked for by the 1st respondent herein/the writ petitioner. with reference to the action that the appellants could take, liberty is given to initiate and complete the same and the 1st respondent herein/the writ petitioner has been directed to give an undertaking and personal bond to subject themselves to any action that the appellants may initiate and also to bind themselves to the ultimate adjudication, subject to their right to challenge such orders in appeal and in other forums. we do not think that the order of the learned single judge requires any revision/rectification. accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed. no costs.

Full Judgment

Nainarsundaram, J.

1. The very counter affidavit of the appellants declared that the container did not contain any contraband or prohibited goods. The only allegation on the part of the appellants is a mis-declaration of the goods and failure to unload the goods as per the import general manifest. In the said circumstances, the learned single Judge rightly held that there is no hurdle in directing re-export of the goods as asked for by the 1st respondent herein/the writ petitioner. With reference to the action that the appellants could take, liberty is given to initiate and complete the same and the 1st respondent herein/the writ petitioner has been directed to give an undertaking and personal bond to subject themselves to any action that the appellants may initiate and also to bind themselves to the ultimate adjudication, subject to their right to challenge such orders in appeal and in other forums. We do not think that the order of the learned single Judge requires any revision/rectification. Accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial