The trial court's failure to consider the defendants' arguments led to an improper interim injunction, necessitating remand for a fresh assessment under applicable laws and regulations.

JUDGMENT

Talwant Singh, J. (ORAL) :--The appellant no. 1 is a duly incorporated company and appellant no. 2 is its director. The appellants have preferred this appeal against the order dated 19.11.2020, passed by the learned District Judge, Commercial Court, South East District at Saket, Delhi, in Civil Suit (Comm.) No. 310/2020, titled Hotel Needs India vs. AVM Cargo Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. By way of the impugned order, the learned District Judge was pleased to direct the present appellants, who are defendant nos. 5 and 6 before the said Court, as under:

"In the facts and circumstances of the case, defendant no. 5 and 6 are directed to release the delivery order as well as original Bill of Lading no. HLCUVAN20070919 of re-import shipment to enable the release of the subject consignment in favour of the plaintiff subject to payment of invoice no. 2074601095 and 2074601097 by the plaintiff within 3 days from the date of the order."

2. The brief history of the case, as per appellants, is that the appellant no.1 is a Shipping Line, engaged in transporting goods through sea. Respondent No. 1 herein is the plaintiff in the suit below, who had appointed respondent nos. 2 and 3 as its Freight Forwarder/Agent for the purpose of exporting a consignment of stainless-steel utensils to its client in Canada, who are respondent nos. 6 and 7 in the present appeal. The agent, appointed by respondent no. 1, had further appointed Freight Forwarder/Agent, who in turn engaged the services of the appellant no.1. When the goods were loaded on the ship, the Bill of Lading dated 18.01.2020 was issued by the present appellant no.1 in the name of respondent no. 1.

3. The cargo reached its destination in Canada on 07.03.2020 but the necessary certificates, i.e., Fumigation Certificate as well as Phytosanitary Certificate were lacking, which were required as per applicable Canadian law and as per the appellants, the said certificates ought to have been furnished by respondent no.1 or respondent no.6, the seller and buyer of the consignment respectively. Due to this reason, the consignment remained uncleared at the Canadian Port and certain charges for demurrage, detention, customs and other incidental charges had been incurred, which were duly billed by appellant no.1 vide invoices dated 23.07.2020 and 24.07.2020. These invoices were raised against respondent no.1 as well as respondent no.6, who are "Shipper" and "Consignee" of the consignment in issue. The said invoices were payable by "Merchant" and the definition of "Merchant" includes "Shipper" and "Consignee" both.

4. Since necessary certificates could not be produced by the Shipper and/or Consignee, the cargo was required to be re-shipped to its place of origin, i.e., India, and accordingly, it was loaded on board by the present appellant no.1 by issuing Bill of Lading dated 30.07.2020 and it reached in October, 2020 at JNPT Port, Uran, Raigad, India. The appellant company refused to issue delivery order of the cargo as well as refused to hand over the Bill of Lading to respondent no.1 till all its dues in respect of detention, demurrage and other charges at the port of destination as well as Indian port are cleared.

5. Respondent no.1 herein filed Civil Suit (Comm.) No. 310/2020 along with an interlocutory application [in short "I.A."], before the District Court, praying for following reliefs:

"(A) The defendants in general, jointly, severally & collectively and D5 and D6 in particular to release forthwith Delivery Order as well as original Bill of Lading No. HLCUVAN20070919 of reimport shipment enabling the release of subject consignment with subject articles in favour of the plaintiff or alternatively to pay the total consignment value of USD 34270/- with all damages and losses caused to the plaintiff in the course to the extent of Rs. 40 lakhs, interest excluded till its final realization, jointly and severally.

(B) To declare the impugned communication of D5 and D6 null and void with respect