TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court clarifies demurrage charges application, emphasizes adherence to pleadings.</h1> <h3>Union of India (UOI) Versus E.I.D. Parry (India) Ltd.</h3> The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal by setting aside the High Court's decision on the Goods Tariff Rule's validity, emphasizing that issues beyond ... - Issues:1. Validity of the Goods Tariff Rule on demurrage charges.2. Application of demurrage charges for the entire block of wagons.3. Distinction between general siding and private siding for demurrage charges.Issue 1: Validity of Goods Tariff Rule on demurrage chargesThe trial court initially decreed the respondent's suit for recovery of demurrage charges, which was later set aside by the first Additional District Judge, Guntur. The High Court, in the Second Appeal, declared the Goods Tariff Rule, which treated the entire group of box wagons as one unit for demurrage charges, as ultra vires. However, the Supreme Court found that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by considering the validity of the Rule without it being part of the pleadings. The Court emphasized that issues beyond the pleadings should not be decided, and the High Court's decision on the Rule's validity was unsustainable.Issue 2: Application of demurrage charges for the entire block of wagonsThe trial court analyzed the Goods Tariff Rule and found that demurrage charges could only be collected for wagons that were not unloaded within the free time allowed. It distinguished between general siding and private siding, concluding that demurrage could not be claimed for the entire block of wagons in the case of private siding. The Supreme Court upheld this finding, noting that demurrage charges could only be levied for the specific wagons that were not unloaded within the prescribed time, based on the Rules applicable to private siding.Issue 3: Distinction between general siding and private siding for demurrage chargesThe trial court's distinction between general siding and private siding in terms of demurrage charges was accepted by the Supreme Court. It was established that demurrage charges for private siding could only be applied to wagons that were not unloaded within the free time, contrary to the Rule applicable to general siding. The Court found no error in this distinction and maintained the trial court's decision on the application of demurrage charges for the block of wagons in the case of private siding.In conclusion, the Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal by setting aside the High Court's decision on the Goods Tariff Rule's validity while upholding the trial court's decree regarding the application of demurrage charges for specific wagons in the context of private siding. The Court emphasized the importance of issues raised in pleadings and limited the scope of the judgment to matters within the pleadings, ensuring adherence to legal principles and procedural fairness.
TaxTMI 
