- (1.) Petitioner claims to be a partnership firm manufacturing woolen carpets and druggets It is stated that the Petitioner was given an import licence by the Government of India on 14-12-1989 and in this connection Petitioner has executed a legal agreement on 24-1-1990, which was accepted by the Government of India on 21-2-1990. It is averred by the Petitioner that it has placed some orders for purchase and import of dyes and Sodium Sulphoxylate Formadehyde from Tianjin Chemicals Import and Export Corporation China, and had also purchased 1475 Kms. Acid Chrome pur Blue-B. The cost of the aforesaid goods comes to Rs. 1,31,520.00 and Rs. 4,32.000/- in Indian currency. It is also alleged that in connection with the import, Petitioner handed over all the original documents in respect of the aforesaid goods to its shipping agents for getting clearance from the custom and the Port of Bombay authorities. The Petitioner further claims that it received letter on 20-4-1991 from the shipping agents to the effect that Marine and Preventive Department inspected the godowns of the shipping agents on 15-4-1991 and had taken away the documents due to which the clearance of the goods is to be delayed till the documents are released, on account of which the demurrage charges of the Port Trust will go up. The Petitioner has accordingly filed this writ petition with the following reliefs: a) to issue writ of mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 1 and/or its Marine and Custom Department its officers or employees to return the documents of the Petitioner's firm in respect of the imported goods which they have taken away from the custody of New Brights Shipping Services forthwith; b) to issue a writ of mandamus commanding Respondent No. 1 and its warehouse agents Respondent No. 5 not to refer the matter to Port Trust and to deliver the goods of the Petitioners forthwith without creating any hindrance in its deliver after taking necessary charges etc.; c) to issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case; d) to award the cost of the petition to the Petitioner.
(2.) In the writ petition the following persons/authorities have been impleaded as Respondents: 1 The Union of India. 2 Chairman Port Trust, Bombay. 3 Custom Officer, Bombay. 4 M/s. S.D. Shipping Services, 82/86 Bazar Gate Street, Narayan Bhavan, 1st Floor, Room No. 103, Fort. Bombay-400001. 5 M/s. James Machintosh and Co. Pvt. Ltd, Post Box No. 123, S.B. Marg, Ballard Estate Bombay. 6 New Bright Shipping Services, 82/86 Bazar Gate Street, Narayan Bhavan, 1st Floor, Room No. 103, Fort, Bombay-400001. This writ petition was filed on 28-5-1991 and on 29-5-1991 this Court passed the interim order staying the auction of the goods imported by the Petitioner. During the pendency of the writ petition the Petitioner has filed an application dated 19-9-1991 for permission to implead the Superintendent of Customs, Central Intelligence Unit. Marine Preventive Wing Bombay as Respondent No. 7. The Petitioner has also made another application dated 19-9-1991 for release of consignments of the goods imported by him details of which have been given in that application.
(3.) In our opinion, this writ petition is not maintainable before this Court. The goods imported by the Petitioner and the documents relating thereto have been detained and seized at Bombay by the Custom and the Marine and preventive Department of Bombay. All the persons and authorities whose acts have been impugned and who have been impleaded as Respondents in this writ petition are of Bombay. The whole cause of action relating to the seizure and detention of the goods and the documents in connection therewith had arisen in Bombay and no part of the cause of action arose in this State. This Court, as such, has no jurisdiction to grant any relief in this writ petition to the Petitioner.;