https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428410 The Civil Court at Bombay had jurisdiction to hear the case despite the defendants' arguments. The court dismissed the misjoinder of parties claim and held defendant no.3 liable as an agent for wrongful delivery. The value of goods was confirmed, and defendants were found responsible for the wrongful delivery. The plaintiff was not required to mitigate loss, and duty drawback did not affect the claim. Damages were awarded in Indian currency with reduced interest. The appeal was partly allowed, with the appellant ordered to pay appeal costs to the respondent. en-us Wed, 28 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Sep 2022 09:37:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428410 The Civil Court at Bombay had jurisdiction to hear the case despite the defendants' arguments. The court dismissed the misjoinder of parties claim and held defendant no.3 liable as an agent for wrongful delivery. The value of goods was confirmed, and defendants were found responsible for the wrongful delivery. The plaintiff was not required to mitigate loss, and duty drawback did not affect the claim. Damages were awarded in Indian currency with reduced interest. The appeal was partly allowed, with the appellant ordered to pay appeal costs to the respondent. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 28 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428410