bgp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.1018 OF 2004

Modi Rubber Ltd.

..Petitioner

Vs.

Union of India & Ors.

..Respondents

Mr.Dhiraj Mhetre i/b. Mustafa Motiwala for petitioner.

Mr.A.S.Rao for respondents.

CORAM :- V.C.DAGA &

K.K.TATED,JJ.

DATE :

29TH JANUARY,2010

P.C.

1.

Heard.

Perused petition.

2.

This petition was admitted by this Court by an order dated 30^th April, 2004.

When the petition was admitted, the matter was pending before the BIFR. Now, the

BIFR has framed a Scheme under the provisions of Sick Industrial Companies (Special

Provisions) Act,1985 (hereinafter referred to as the “SICA”). The sanctioned scheme

is placed before us. Clause 7.34 of the said Scheme reads as under:

7.34

The representative of Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai stated the

company has not paid the duty on goods imported and demurrage is being

incurred and Rs.8.40 crore plus interest due. The Learned Advocate

representing the company stated that MRL has applied for extension of the

validity of the import license and the company will clear the goods once the

validity of the license is extended. The custom authorities may consider the

request of the company favourably.

3.

Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has

already applied for extension of the validity of the import license and the petitioner

has also made some payments from time to time. Under the scheme, the Custom

Authorities are directed to consider the request of the Company favourably. Under

these circumstances, since the petitioner is already before the Customs Authority, we

have no manner of doubt that the Customs Authority will consider the request of the

petitioner in accordance with the Scheme framed by the BIFR. In the facts and

circumstances of the case, no further orders are necessary. The petition accordingly

stands disposed of keeping all contentions open. No order as to costs.

(K.K.TATED,J.)

(V.C.DAGA,J.)