Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the detained vehicles and goods were liable to be released after the petitioner furnished bank guarantees as required under the statutory scheme, and whether continued detention thereafter was justified.
Analysis: The petitioner showed that the goods were accompanied by supporting documents and that part payment had already been made through banking channels. Bank guarantees for 30% of the invoice value were furnished, which satisfied the statutory requirement referred to by the Court. In these circumstances, there was no justification for retaining the vehicles and goods after the guarantees were provided, and the State fairly undertook to release them forthwith. The Court also found that detention after that date was without justification and warranted an award of costs.
Conclusion: The goods and vehicles were directed to be released forthwith, and the petitioner was held entitled to costs of Rs. 25,000.
Final Conclusion: Furnishing the required bank guarantee removed the basis for further detention, and the petitioner obtained relief with compensation in costs for the unwarranted continuation of detention.
Ratio Decidendi: Once the statutory security is furnished, continued detention of goods without justification cannot be sustained and the goods must be released.