INTERNATIONAL AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ETC. versus M/S GRAND SLAM INTERNATIONAL AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1995] 2 S.C.R. 149 · Decided: 21-02-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.M. SAHAI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ETC. E'fC. A 
v 
MIS GRAND SLAM INTERNATIONAL AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
FEBRUARY 21, 1995 
[R.M.' SAHAI, S.P. BHARUCHA AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.) 
B 
Customs Act--Section45--Levy of demurrage-/mport of goods-
Detention for clearanc~oods detained or seized by Customs depart-
ment-Detention certificate issued by Customs Authorities-Whether any c 
demu"age could have been charged for ~e period detention certificate was 
issued-Held, yes. 
,, 
, 
I 
The respondents had imported goods by air· and. filed bills of entry 
with the Customs authorities. The Customs authorities detained the goods 
and passed an order enhancing the value of the goods. In appeal, the D 
Custom, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal quashed the order 
) 
of the Additional Collector; the goods were released and the Collector of 
Customs issued detention certificates for the periods of the detention 
stating that the detention was due to pendency of acJJudicatlon proceed· 
ings. The respondents thereupon applied to the Authority for waiver of E 
demumige charges for the perl'>ds covered by the detention certificates. 
However, the appellants Instead of treating entire period as free period 
determined the liability of the respondent in accordance with Rate 
Schedule framed by them for the periods for which the detention certifi· 
_I, 
cates had been issued. 'The.respondents filed writ petitions challengJng the 
requirement to ·pay demurrage for the periods for which the detention F 
certificates bad been issued. The High Court, while allowing the petitions 
held that Airport Authority and the Central Warehousing Corporation 
being custodian of the Customs Department, the Authority was not entitled 
to recover any amount on account of demurrage charges for the periods 
_/ 
for which detention certificates bad been issued. These appeals bad been G 
Oled against the Judgment and orders of· the High Court directing the 
--( 
appellant to release the go~ds imported by the respondents without cbarg· 
Ing any demurrage thereon for the periods for which defentlon certificates 
had been Issued by the Collector of Customs. 
Th~ appellant urged that the power to levy demurnp bJ the mter- H.· 
149 
150 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1995] 2 S.C.R. 
I 
A national Airport Authority of India is derived from the International 
Airport Authority Act, 1971, it could not be regulated or controlled by any · 
order statute; that the Customs Authorities could neither levy demurrage 
no waive it, therefore, the Detention Certificate could not compel the 
. appellants to treat the entire period during which the goods remained in 
their custody to be free period and that the rate schedule for. demurrage 
B having been made in exercise of statutory power and the appellants have 
been granted waiver to the extent of 80% und~r the Policy framed by the 
IAAI, the respondents were not entitled to any relief. 
c 
Allowing these appeals, this Court 
HELD: Per Majority (S.P. Bharucha and N. Venkatachala, JJ. by 
} separate concurring judgments). 
The orders passed by the High Court relieving respondent-1 from 
his liability to pay demurrage charges were liable to be set aside and the 
D Writ Petition stand dismissed. [199-A, B] 
Per S.P. Bh<l1Ucha, J. 
1.1. An importer is liable to pay demurrage th«>ugh he is not respon· 
sible for the delay in clearing his goods. Under the provisions of the 
E International Airports Authority Act, 1971, the International Airports 
Authority of India are entitled to charge demurrage even in respect of 
periods during which the importer was unable to clear goods from its 
premises for no fault or negligence on his part. The Authority was entitled 
to charge demurrage even hi respect ,of periods during which the importer 
p was unable to clear goods because of the detention thereof by the Customs 
authorities and also for the period for which a detention certificate bad 
been issued. The Airport Authority is an entity in its own right. By virtue· 
of the power vested in the Authority u/s 37, the Authority bas framed 
regulations called the IAAI (Storage and Processing of Goods) Regula-
tions, 1980. Under the Regulations the Authority is empowered to levy 
G ·charges, including storage charges and demurrage. The Authority may in 
its discretion waive charges in deserving cases. The provisions of the 
In~ernational Airports Authority Act, 1971 are similar to the provisions of 
, the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 and th

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.