LexBUSSA OVERSEAS & PROPERTIES (P) LTD. & ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D E F G H [2016) l S.C.R. 266 BUSSA OVERSEAS & PROPERTIES (P) LTD. & ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 2687 of2006) JANUARY 22, 2016 [DIPAK MISRA AND SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, JJ] Review: Scope of - Refund claim - Custom duty - Department dismissed the claim on the ground that same was filed u/s.27 of Customs Act and the appellant had not complied with the formalities envisaged under the said provision - Writ petition - Dismissed by High Court - Review petition - Dismissal of - Special leave petition against order passed in review petition - Maintainability of - Held: Not maintainable - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Or.47 r. 7 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 136 - Customs Act, 1962 - s.27. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: When the prayer for review is dismissed, there can be no merger. If the order passed in review recalls the main order and a different order is passed, definitely the main order does not exist. In that event, there is no need to challenge the main order, for it is the order in review that affects the aggrieved party. Though the decisions in Shanker Motiram Nale, the two-Judge Bench referred to Order 47 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure that bars an appeal against the order of the court rejecting the review, it is not to be understood that the court has curtailed the plenary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution by taking recourse to the provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure. It has to be understood that the Court has evolved and formulated a principle that if the basic judgment is not assailed and the challenge is only to the order passed in review, this Court is obliged not to entertain such special leave petition. The said principle has gained the authoritative status and has been treated as a precedential principle for more than two decades and there is hardly any necessity not to be guided by the said precedent. [Para 26] [281-C-F] Shanker Motiram Nale v. Shiolalsing Gannusing Rajput (1994) 2 SCC 753; State of Assam v. Ripa Sarma 2013 ( 4) SCR 151 : (2013) 3 SCC 63 - relied on. 266 BUSSA OVERSEAS & PROPERTIES (P) LTD. v. UNION OF 267 INDIA Durga Shankar Mehta v. Thakur Raghuraj Singh and A others (1955) 1 SCR 267 : AIR 1954 SC 520 - held inapplicable. Thungabhadra Industries Ltd. v. Government of Andhra Pradesh (1964) 5 SCR 174 : AIR 1964 SC 1372 - Distinguished Collector of Central Excise v. India Tyre and Rubber Co. Ltd. 1997. (94) ELT 495 (Mad.); Hindustan Metal Pressing Works v. Commissioner of Central Excise 2003 (153) ELT 15 (S.C.); Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India 89 ELT 247 (S.C.); Union of India v. Jain Spinners Ltd. 1992 (61) ELT 321 (S.C.); Alcatel Modi Net Works Systems v. Commissioner of Customs 2000 (117) ELT 522 (Tribunal); Kunhyammed v. State of Kerala 2001 (129) ELT 11 (S.C.); Suseel Finance & Leasing Co. v. M. Lata and others (2004) 13 SCC 675; M.N. Haider and others v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and others (2004) 13 SCC 677; Shiv Charan Singh v. State of Punjab and others 2006 (9) Suppl. SCR 143 : (2007) 15 SCC 370; Ravi alias Ravichandran v. State represented by Inspector of Police 2007 (5 ) SCR 766 : (2007) 15 SCC 372; Vinod Kapoor v. State of Goa and others 2012 (8) SCR 1089 : (2012) 12 SCC 378; Sandhya Educational Society and another v. Union of India and others (2014) 7 SCC 701; Mahendra Saree Emporium (II) v. G V Srinivasa Murthy 2004 (3) Suppl. SCR 931 : (2005) 1 SCC 481; Green View Tea & Industries v. Collector (2004) 4 SCC 122; K. Rajamouli v. A. VK.N. Swamy 2001 (3) SCR 473 : (2001) 5 SCC 37; Eastern Coalfields Limited v. Dugal Kumar 2008 (11) SCR 369 : (2008) 14 SCC 295; Krishena Kumar v. Union of India and others 1990 (3) SCR 352 : (1990) 4 SCC 207; Government of Andhra Pradesh and others v. A.P. Jaiswal and others AIR 2001 SC 499 - referred to. Quinn v. Leathern (1901) AC 495; Caledonian Railway Co. v. Walkers Trustees (1882) 7 App Cas 259 : 46 LT 826 (HL) - referred to. B c D E F G H 268 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] 1 S.C.R. A Case Law Reference 1997 (94) ELT 495 (Mad.) referred to. Para4 2003 (153) ELT 15 (S.C.) referred to. Para4 S9 ELT 247 (S.C.) referred to. Para7 B 1992 (61) ELT 321 (S.C.) referred to. Para7 2000 (117) ELT 522 (Tribunal) referred to. Para7 2001 (129) ELT 11 (S.C.) referred to. Para7 (1994) 2 sec 753 relied on. Paras c (2004) 13 sec 675 referred to. Paras (2004)
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.