1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.708 OF 2003 The Board of Trustees of the Port Mumbai ...Plaintiffs vs. 1. Carol Export 2. Transworld Shipping Services P.Ltd. 3 W.W.Shipping Agencies Pvt.Ltd. ...Defendants Ms Preeti Shah i/b M/s.Motiwalla & Co.for the plaintiffs None for the defendant CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : NOVEMBER 3, 2009 JUDGMENT : 1 The suit has been set down under the caption of undefended suits for exparte decree . The plaintiffs are constituted under the Major Port Trusts Act,1963 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). According to the case of the plaintiffs, the 1 st defendants are consignees/importers/owners of the consignments of 98 barrels of Furnace Oil weighing 18,620 kgs packed in steel barrels. The said consignment was manifested at item no.152 of the Import General Manifest No.4681 dated 4 th February 2000 of the vessel Al Wattyah. According to the plaintiffs, the 2 nd and 3 rd defendants were at the material items agents of the vessel Al Wattyah According to the plaintiffs, 2 nd and 3 rd defendants were the agents for loading and unloading of the consignment as well as 2 the agents for the sale and custody thereof and therefore, are the owners within the meaning of the said Act. 2 Reliance has been placed on the letter dated 28 th February 2000 addressed by the plaintiffs informing the defendants that the consignments were lying in the docks at Bombay for more than 2 months. Reliance is placed on procedure followed by publiation of auction notice. It is contended that on 5 th September 2000, the consignment was sold at the price of Rs.1,20,333/-. After adjusting the sale price against the Port Trust charges amounting to Rs.1,60,634/-, custom duty charges amounting to Rs. 48,315/- and expenses of sale amounting to Rs.12,033/-, a deficit of Rs.1,00.649/- remained payable to the plaintiffs. 3 Reliance has been placed on demand notice as well as final notice addressed to the defendants. It is stated that the compliance was not made with the notices. The plaintiffs filed an affidavit of documents of Mr.I.S.Swamy,An Assistant Docks Manager and Authorised signatory of the plaintiffs. An affidavit in lieu of examination in chief of the same Officer along with the original documents have been tendered on record. I have perused the said affidavit and original documents. 3 4 The case made out in the plaint and affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief has gone unchallenged. The documents produced on record prove that after following due procedure, the consignment was auctioned. The claim of the plaintiffs in the suit is for recovery of the deficit amount with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of demand notice till the date of institution of the suit. The said claim has been established by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs have prayed for further interest at the rate of 18% per annum Considering the nature of the transaction and facts and circumstances of the case, interest deserves to be fixed at the rate of 9% per annum. 5 Hence, I pass the following order : i) There will be a decree in terms of prayer clause (a) with modification that further interest payable will be at the rate of 9% per annum on sum of Rs. 1,00,649/- from the date of institution of the suit till payment and/or realisation. ii)The plaintiffs will be entitled to refund of court fees as per the rules. JUDGE