RP No. 1004 of 2008 · Kerala High Court
Judgment
BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR SRI.TOJAN J.VATHIKULAM,SC,C.B. EXCISE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- ALLURE IMPEX, 28, CENTURY BAZAR LANE, PRABHADEVI, MUMBAI-400 025, REP. BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER ATIQ EBRAHIM SHAIK 19, ESHWAR BHAVAN CO.OP. HOUSING SOCIETY ERSKIN ROAD, MUMBAI-400 003. BY ADV.. GEORGE POONTHOTTAM THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/10/2008, ALONG WITH RP NO. 1005 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.Nos.1004 & 1005 of 2008 in W.P.(C) Nos.24779 & 24765 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2008.
O R D E R The Commissioner of Customs, the 2nd respondent in the writ petition has come up with these Review Petitions seeking review of my common judgment dated 18.8.2008 in W.P.(C) Nos. 24765/08 and 24779/08. The main reason stated for the review is that the writ petition came up for admission on 18th and before the Assistant Solicitor General could take detailed instructions in the matter, the writ petition was disposed of. It is further stated that in view of the averments in the Review Petitions, especially the fact that the importer himself has given statement in one of the cases to the effect that he has not imported the goods, the judgment requires to be reviewed. In the other case, it is stated that the importer is not the petitioner in the writ petition. On consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that in view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Customs should be given another opportunity to contest the cases on merits in the light of the R.P.Nos.1004 & 1005 of 2008 in W.P.(C) Nos.24779 & 24765/08 - 2 - documents now relied upon in the Review Petition. It is further submitted before me that writ petition viz; 25947/2008 is now pending before this Court in respect of the same subject matter in which this Court has appointed an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the goods in question. In the above circumstances, my common judgment dated 18.8.2008 is recalled and the writ petitions are restored to file. The same shall be posted before the appropriate Court along with W.P.(C) No. 25947 of 2008 for further proceedings. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.