<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1962 (12) TMI 79 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187283</link>
    <description>The Madras Port Trust Act, 1905 was read as authorising the Port Trust to provide landing, receiving, removal, transport, storage and delivery services at the request of the ship-side party, and to recover sanctioned rates with statutory force. On that construction, the Port Trust was not acting as agent of the consignee when the disputed idle-shore-labour and multiple-hook charges arose. The charges were treated as service-related rates, not damages, because they arose from the vessel&#039;s requirements and the labour arrangement for quicker discharge of cargo. The Act&#039;s lien and rate provisions supported recovery from the master, owner or agent of the vessel, and payment could validly be required from the steamer agent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:14:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=445016" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (12) TMI 79 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187283</link>
      <description>The Madras Port Trust Act, 1905 was read as authorising the Port Trust to provide landing, receiving, removal, transport, storage and delivery services at the request of the ship-side party, and to recover sanctioned rates with statutory force. On that construction, the Port Trust was not acting as agent of the consignee when the disputed idle-shore-labour and multiple-hook charges arose. The charges were treated as service-related rates, not damages, because they arose from the vessel&#039;s requirements and the labour arrangement for quicker discharge of cargo. The Act&#039;s lien and rate provisions supported recovery from the master, owner or agent of the vessel, and payment could validly be required from the steamer agent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187283</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>