Bona fide customs detention for verification does not automatically shift demurrage liability to Customs after a detention certificate.

Bona fide customs detention for verification was justified where imported goods were described inconsistently and the labels created doubt, so detaining 20% of the consignment for testing was not mala fide, especially as the balance was released and the goods were ultimately found to match the bills of entry. A detention certificate only showed that the importer was not at fault for the delay; it did not, by itself, shift liability for demurrage or detention charges to Customs. The importer remained liable for those charges absent exceptional facts, which were not shown, and the suit was rightly dismissed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Customs authorities acted without justification or in mala fide manner in detaining a part of the imported goods for testing; (ii) Whether issuance of a detention certificate entitled the importer to recover demurrage and detention charges from the Customs authorities despite the charges being payable to the custodian and shipping agency.

Issue (i): The imported consignments were described in inconsistent terms as newsprint and printing paper, and the labels on the goods created doubt requiring verification. The detention of 20% of the consignment for testing was held to be a bona fide exercise of statutory duty, especially since the remaining 80% had been released without delay and the goods were ultimately found to be as per the bills of entry.

Conclusion: The detention was justified and could not be treated as illegal or mala fide.

Issue (ii): A detention certificate only indicated that the importer was not at fault for the detention; it did not by itself create a right to recover demurrage or detention charges from the Customs authorities. Liability for such charges remained with the importer unless the case fell within exceptional facts warranting a different result, which was not established here. The importer's own conduct in delaying release after the certificate also contributed to the loss.

Conclusion: The importer was not entitled to recover demurrage and detention charges from the Customs authorities merely on the basis of the detention certificate.

Final Conclusion: The decree in favour of the importer was unsustainable on facts and law, and the suit was rightly dismissed after setting aside the ex parte decree.

Ratio Decidendi: Bona fide detention of imported goods for necessary customs verification does not, by itself, make the Customs authorities liable for demurrage or confer an automatic right on the importer to recover such charges merely because a detention certificate has been issued.

---