Interim relief cannot replace final relief, and lockdown shipping advisories did not override private contractual arrangements.

Interim relief should not ordinarily grant the same substantive relief sought in the main proceedings, especially where doing so would effectively decide the dispute finally. In lockdown-related cargo disputes, shipping and port advisories were treated as time-bound advisories rather than mandatory directions binding private shipping lines or their agents, so they did not automatically override existing contractual arrangements. Because the dispute was largely contractual and no exceptional basis for interlocutory interference was shown, provisional clearance of imported cargo and restraint against detention-related charges were refused, and the refusal to extend the advisory benefit to private entities was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to interim relief directing provisional clearance of imported cargo by extending the lockdown-related benefit of the shipping and port advisories and by restraining recovery of detention and allied charges from private shipping entities.

Analysis: The relief sought in the appeals was substantially the same as the main relief claimed in the writ petitions, and granting it at the interim stage would effectively decide the dispute finally. Interim relief cannot be used to confer the substantive relief itself except in rare and exceptional cases. The materials placed before the Court also showed that the relevant shipping advisories were time-bound and were treated as advisories, not mandatory directions binding private shipping lines and their agents. The dispute was therefore substantially contractual in nature, and the Court found no gross error in the view that the appellants had not made out a case for interference at the interlocutory stage. The Court also accepted that the earlier Delhi High Court view supported the conclusion that such advisories did not override private contractual arrangements.

Conclusion: The appellants were not entitled to the requested interim relief, and the refusal to extend the benefit of the advisories to private shipping entities was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The interlocutory order declining provisional relief was left undisturbed, and the appeals were rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Final relief should not ordinarily be granted as interim relief, and advisory directions issued in a lockdown context do not automatically become enforceable against private parties governed by concluded contracts unless the statutory framework clearly makes them binding.

---