A Mercedez Benz Car covered by Bill of Entry imported per M.V. Prema Glory V, 220 dated 19.6.2001 manifested in the name of one Sri. E.N. Premraj, Rinziyil House, Palavur, Chavakkad P.O., Thrissur Dist. was detained by the customs authorities on the ground that the petitioner sought to take delivery of the said vehicle. Though the steamer agent sought for amendment of the IGM in favour of the petitioner on 4.10.2001 the same was not allowed and the case was adjudicated by the Commissioner of Customs vide Order No. 12/2002 dated 16.4.2002 wherein the amendment sought for was not allowed. Both the petitioner and the department went in appeal before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (for short ‘CEGAT’), South Zonal Bench, Bangalore and the CEGAT by order dated 22.11.2002 (Ext.P1), referring to a decision in Sun Export Corporation v. Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay (1997 (96) ELT PG 3), remitted the matter to the Commissioner to examine the issue afresh and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law after providing an opportunity to the party. Pursuant to the said direction the Commissioner allowed the claim for amendment and intimated the said fact by communication dated 29.7.2003(Ext.P3).

2. The petitioner thereafter submitted application dated 31.10.2003(Ext.P4) to the 1st respondent for issue of detention certificate for the clearance of the imported car. The Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Appraising (Import) in the office of the 1st respondent issued a communication dated 19.11.2003 (Ext.P5) to the petitioner enclosing the detention certificate of the same date (Ext.P6). It is stated both in Ext.P5 and in Ext.P6 that the car could not be cleared by the petitioner so far due to the pendency of the proceedings. The said authority also requested the 2nd respondent to consider the request for waiver of demurrage charges from the petitioner for the period from 4.10.2001 to 29.7.2003. The petitioner thereafter sent a letter to the Deputy Commissioner (Customs) pointing out that the detention certificate issued is only for the period upto 29.7.2003 and that the petitioner is also entitled to the detention certificate for the period from 29.7.2003 till the release of the vehicle. The petitioner thereafter submitted a representation (Ext.P8) to the 3rd respondent requesting for a sympathetic view and to waive the demurrage charges as a special case.

3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for direction to the 1st respondent to issue detention certificate and the waiver of demurrage charges for the release of the petitioner’s Mercedez Benz Car for the period on which it was imported to India till it is cleared by the 2nd respondent. The petitioner also sought for direction to respondents 2 and 3 to release the said vehicle without insisting on payment of demurrage charges in view of Exts. P5 and P6 orders issued by the 1st respondent and direct the 1st respondent to pay the demurrage charges in case it is insisted by the said respondents for the release of the car.

4. A statement is filed on behalf of the 1st respondent. It is explained therein that the vehicle was imported by a vessel arrived at June 2001 at Kochi, that as per the import manifest filed by the steamer agent the importer was one Sri. E.N. Premaraj, Thrissur, that therefore he was the owner of the vehicle and he alone was entitled to celar the vehicle, that subsequently the steamer agent made a request on 4.10.2001 to amend the name of the importer in the manifest as Smt. Annakkutty Joseph instead of Sri. E.N. Premaraj on the ground that Sri. Premaraj failed to fulfil the contract with the seller and the vehicle has been resold to Smt. Annakutty Joseph, that in the meantime, in an investigation conducted by the department, Sri. Premraj deposed in a statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 that he had not purchased the car but the car arrived in his name and thus the import appeared to be in con