High Court Allows Export of Broken Rice Despite Government Notification

The Andhra Pradesh High Court granted permission to the petitioners to export broken rice under a specific sale agreement with M/s. Capezzana Commodities Geneva, despite a prohibitory notification issued by the government. The court emphasized the petitioners' initiation of purchase and contractual obligations, allowing them to proceed with their export activities in line with the existing agreement. This decision reflects the court's recognition of contractual commitments and the adverse effects of abrupt regulatory interventions on business operations.

---

---

Issues: Export of broken rice under a prohibitory order

Analysis:
The judgment issued by the Andhra Pradesh High Court pertains to a case where the petitioners, engaged in the business of procurement and export of rice, entered into a supply agreement with M/s. Capezzana Commodities Geneva. However, their export activities were hindered by a notification issued by the 1st respondent, banning the export of broken rice under a specific HS code. The petitioners argued that this sudden notification would cause damages to their business and lead to arbitration proceedings against them in London.

The court considered a similar case decided by the High Court of Calcutta, where despite a prohibitory order, the petitioner was allowed to export goods to Bangladesh as they had already undertaken the execution of the contract. Drawing parallels, the petitioners in the present case provided evidence of initiating the purchase of broken rice from various dealers to fulfill their agreement with M/s. Capezzana Commodities Geneva.

Furthermore, the judgment highlighted previous instances where the High Court of Andhra Pradesh had granted interim directions in similar circumstances, allowing export activities to proceed. Considering the facts presented, the court granted permission to the petitioners to export the broken rice solely in accordance with their agreement with M/s. Capezzana Commodities Geneva.

In conclusion, the court's decision allowed the petitioners to continue their export activities under the specific sale agreement, despite the prohibitory notification issued by the government. The case demonstrates the court's consideration of contractual obligations and the potential impact of sudden regulatory changes on business operations.

---