Court Orders Release of Detained Chinese Carpets Despite Demurrage Charges

The court addressed issues concerning the release of detained Chinese Knotted Woollen Carpets by customs and the demand for demurrage charges by the shipping line. Despite a previous order for immediate release, the goods were withheld due to excessive demurrage charges. The court acknowledged the legal arguments regarding contractual lien and demurrage charges, reserving the respondent's right to present further contentions. An interim order was issued for the release of the goods pending a comprehensive hearing to resolve all relevant issues.

---

---

Issues:
1. Release of consignment of Chinese Knotted Woollen Carpets detained by customs.
2. Demand for demurrage charges by the shipping line.
3. Legal contentions regarding contractual lien and demurrage charges.

Issue 1: Release of consignment of Chinese Knotted Woollen Carpets detained by customs:
The petitioner sought the release of a consignment of carpets detained by customs. Despite a previous court order directing immediate release, the consignment remained undelivered due to the respondent demanding demurrage charges exceeding the value of the goods. The court noted the delay and issued notice to the respondents, scheduling a hearing to address the matter.

Issue 2: Demand for demurrage charges by the shipping line:
The respondent shipping line argued for the payment of container detention charges before allowing the petitioner to retrieve the goods. Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the respondent claimed a contractual lien over the goods until the charges were settled. The court acknowledged the legal position but reserved the right for the respondent to present all legal contentions, including the contractual lien, at a later date.

Issue 3: Legal contentions regarding contractual lien and demurrage charges:
The petitioner relied on a previous court order stating that customs cargo service providers are not entitled to charge rent or demurrage on seized goods. However, the respondent differentiated the case, asserting that the previous order did not apply to the current situation. The court admitted the writ application, reserving the respondent's right to raise legal contentions, including the contractual lien. An interim order was issued for the release of goods pending the final judgment, with a hearing scheduled to address all pertinent issues comprehensively.

---