SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(SC) 648

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.M.Sahai : S.C.Agrawal
State Trading Corporation Of India Limited
Versus
Union Of India
Case No. : 623-30 of 1980
Date of Decision : 7/15/94
Advocates Appeared: Ahmed Altaf : Atreya S. : Chatterjee G.S. : Dhamija Y.P. : Jain S.K. : Nambiyar A.S. : Singh Niranjana : Subhashini A.

Advocates:
A.S.NAMBIYAR, A.Subhashini, Altaf Ahmed, G.S.CHATTERJEE, Niranjana Singh, S.Atreya, S.K.JAIN, Y.P.DHAMIJA

Headnote:

Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 – Section 3 – Export (Control) Order, 1977 – Contract Act – Section 56 – Central government to make a provision for prohibiting, restricting or otherwise controlling, in all cases or in specified classes of cases, and subject to such exceptions if any, as may be made by or under order import export carriage coastwise or shipment as ship stores of goods of any specified description – In exercise of said power central government has been controlling export of goods from country – Insofar as silver is concerned its export was completely prohibited till notification export of silver was canalised through the State Trading Corporation appellant – Held, Question as to applicability of indemnity clause in contract between Indian suppliers and the appellant to claims by the foreign buyers against the appellant was not specifically raised before High court and High court has not dealt with said question cannot construed as a decision on this question – Question will have to be considered if and when it arises in light of particular case do not propose to go into same and we leave it to parties to raise it in appropriate proceedings in event of such a contingency arising on account of appellant being found liable for damages to foreign buyers – Learned Additional Solicitor General in support of appeals has raised said question and has urged that in spite of frustration of contract between appellant and foreign buyers indemnity clause between Indian suppliers and appellant remain operative and in event of appellant being held liable for damages in a claim by foreign buyers appellant should be entitled to reimbursement on basis of indemnity clause – Appeals are disposed.

JUDGMENT

S.C. AGRAWAL, J.

(1) THESE appeals are directed against the common judgment of the High court of Delhi dated 29/10/1979 in the writ petitions assailing the amendments introduced in the Export (Control) Order, 1977 on 20/2/1979 whereby a ban on the export of silver was imposed by the government of India.

(2) IMPORT and export of goods is controlled by the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. Section 3 of the said Act empowers the central government to make a provision for prohibiting, restricting or otherwise controlling, in all cases or in specified classes of cases, and subject to such exceptions, if any, as may be made by or under the order the import, export, carriage coastwise or shipment as ship stores of goods of any specified description. In exercise of the said power, the central government has been controlling the export of goods from the country. Insofar as silver is concerned its export was completely prohibited till 1974. The said ban was lifted in February 1974. By notification dated 26/8/1976, the export of silver was canalised through the State Trading Corporation, appellant herein. The scheme for canalisation of export of silver through the appellant envisaged:

(I) a Business Associateship Contract which was required to be entered into by the local supplier/dealer/exporter of silver with the appellant;

(II) a separate contract for export of specified quantity of silver by the local supplier to be entered into between the appellant and the local supplier/dealer/exporter of silver; and

(III) a contract to be entered into by the appellant with the foreign buyer for export of silver.

(3) UNDER the said scheme for canalisation, the appellant was to undertake market surveys on behalf of the buyer and to negotiate and conclude export contracts for export of silver in consultation with the supplier and was entitled to a consideration of 1 % of the value of invoice.

(4) UNDER the Export (Control) Order, 1977 promulgated by the central government under Section 3 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, silver bullion, silver sheets and plates which have not undergone any process of manufacture subsequent to rolling were listed at S. No. 77 (i) in Part B of Schedule I to the said order and the export of these items was allowed through the appellant only within a limited ceiling permissible subject to certain conditions specified in Column (3 of the Schedule. By Exports (Control) Fifteenth Amendment Order, 1979 issued on 20/2/1979 the said item was deleted from Part B of Schedule I and was inserted at S. No. 47 in Part A of Schedule I to the said order and as a result these items became classified in the category of goods which are normally not allowed to be exported. On 20/2/1979 the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports issued a Public Notice banning the export of these items with immediate effect.

(5) THE writ petitioners (Respondents 5 and 6 in the appeals) had entered into contracts with the appellant prior to 20/2/1979 for supply of silver for the purpose of export. In view of the ban imposed on the export of silver by notification dated 20/2/1979 they filed writ petitions in the Delhi High court wherein it was prayed that appropriate orders or writs may be issued restraining the Union of India, the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports and the Collector of Customs from enforcing the terms of the notification dated 20/2/1979 in respect of pre-ban commitments where contracts in respect thereof had already been duly registered under Column (3 of Item 77 of Part B of Schedule I to the Exports (Control) Order, 1977. In the alternative it was prayed that the said notification dated 20/2/1979 be declared as unconstitutional being violative of Article 19(l)(g) of the Constitution. The appellant was also impleaded as a respondent in the said writ petitions. The writ petitions were dismissed by the High court by judgment dated 29/10/1979. The High c









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top