{"id":230555,"date":"2007-02-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-02-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007"},"modified":"2018-03-02T22:33:13","modified_gmt":"2018-03-02T17:03:13","slug":"s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007","title":{"rendered":"S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: . A Pasayat<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, Tarun Chatterjee<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  804 of 2005\n\nPETITIONER:\nS.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. and Anr\n\nRESPONDENT:\nUnion of India and Ors\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 27\/02\/2007\n\nBENCH:\nDr. ARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; TARUN CHATTERJEE\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T <\/p>\n<p>Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tChallenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division<br \/>\nBench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissing the<br \/>\nReview Petition filed by the appellants. This is in essence the<br \/>\nsecond journey of the appellants in respect of a Writ Petition<br \/>\n(W.P.No.522\/90) filed before the High Court. The said Writ<br \/>\nPetition was disposed of by order dated 3.3.1994. The same<br \/>\nwas filed for quashing the proceedings initiated by respondent<br \/>\nNo.3 i.e. Superintendent (Preventive) Central Excise, Indore.<br \/>\nDuring the pendency of the petition, orders were passed<br \/>\nquantifying the liability of appellant No.1 for imposition of<br \/>\npenalty. These orders were challenged in the writ petition by<br \/>\namending the same. The High Court quashed the orders so far<br \/>\nas they related to imposition of penalty. Questioning the<br \/>\ncorrectness of the order an appeal was filed before this Court<br \/>\nwhich was disposed of by order dated 16.4.2002. Basically,<br \/>\ntwo stands were taken in the appeal. This Court did not<br \/>\ninterfere with the order of the High Court on the aspect of<br \/>\nmanufacture. The residual argument was that since the High<br \/>\nCourt had quashed the penalty imposed by the Collector,<br \/>\nCentral Excise by taking a view that the appellants were under<br \/>\na bona fide belief that they were not liable to pay excise duty<br \/>\non limestone chips, the High Court ought to have struck down<br \/>\nthe demand of duty based on Section 11A of the Central<br \/>\nExcise Act, 1944 (in short the &#8216;Act&#8217;). This Court dealt with that<br \/>\naspect of the challenge in the following words:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The next argument is that the High Court<br \/>\nquashed the penalty imposed by the Collector,<br \/>\nCentral Excise, upon the appellants taking the<br \/>\nview the appellants were under a bona fide<br \/>\nbelief that they were not liable to pay excise<br \/>\nduty on limestone chips. It is submitted that<br \/>\nthe High Court should, therefore, have also<br \/>\nstruck down the demand of duty based on<br \/>\nSection 11A. We have gone through the<br \/>\njudgment of the High Court. We find that no<br \/>\nsuch argument is recorded by the High Court<br \/>\nor answered . If it was the contention of the<br \/>\nappellants that the High Court had not<br \/>\nanswered an argument that had been<br \/>\nadvanced before it, they should have<br \/>\napproached the High Court in review. As it is,<br \/>\nwe are of the view that only the arguments<br \/>\nrecorded by the High Court and answered<br \/>\nrequire our consideration.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe appeal is dismissed with costs.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\tA review petition was filed before the High Court, inter<br \/>\nalia, taking the stand that this Court had permitted filing of a<br \/>\nreview.  The same was filed purportedly on the basis of the<br \/>\nobservations made by this Court to the effect that it was the<br \/>\ncontention of the appellants that the High Court had not<br \/>\nanswered an argument that had been advanced before it and if<br \/>\nthat was the contention of the appellants they should have<br \/>\napproached the High Court in review. The High Court noted<br \/>\nthat there was no ground taken in the writ petition.  Learned<br \/>\ncounsel appearing for the appellants before the High Court<br \/>\nconceded that no such ground was taken in the earlier S.L.P.\n<\/p>\n<p>The High Court was of the view that an application for<br \/>\nreview was to be entertained only if such ground was raised in<br \/>\nthe writ petition before the Court and the Court had omitted to<br \/>\nconsider the same. From the records it was noted that no such<br \/>\nground was raised. The High Court was, therefore, of the view<br \/>\nthat no ground for review of the judgment existed and<br \/>\ndismissed the same.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLearned counsel for the appellants submitted that<br \/>\nthough in the original writ petition such a stand was not taken<br \/>\nbut in the amended writ petition such a stand was taken and,<br \/>\ntherefore the High Court was not justified in its view.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tPer contra, learned counsel for the respondents<br \/>\nsubmitted that though there was no specific plea in this<br \/>\nregard and some vague assertions had been made, the point<br \/>\nwas not urged for consideration before the High Court.<br \/>\nTherefore, the review has been rightly dismissed considering<br \/>\nthe limited nature of the review.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWe find that after the amendment, para 10(G) of writ<br \/>\npetition shows some vague reference to the question of<br \/>\nlimitation. In fact reference is made therein to paragraph 7.<br \/>\nThe High Court has categorically stated that no such stand<br \/>\nwas taken and in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents<br \/>\nbefore this Court it has been categorically stated that no such<br \/>\nargument was advanced.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe High Court&#8217;s findings are in the following terms:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Learned senior counsel for the applicants<br \/>\nsubmits that since in the facts and<br \/>\ncircumstances of the present case extended<br \/>\nperiod of five years under Section 11A could<br \/>\nnot have been invoked by the respondent<br \/>\nauthorities, the order deserves to be reviewed.<br \/>\nKeeping in view the observation of the Hon&#8217;ble<br \/>\nSupreme Court, the counsel was asked to<br \/>\npoint out from the record whether such a<br \/>\ncontention had been raised before the High<br \/>\nCourt in the writ petition and any such ground<br \/>\nwas taken in the S.L.P. before the Apex Court.<br \/>\nLearned counsel frankly conceded that such a<br \/>\nground was not taken in the S.L.P.  So far as<br \/>\nthe entitlement of the applicants for review is<br \/>\nconcerned, the petitioner can claim the same<br \/>\nonly if the petitioner had raised such a ground<br \/>\nin the writ petition before the Court and Court<br \/>\nhad omitted to consider the same. From the<br \/>\nrecord, it does not appear that any such<br \/>\nground was raised in the original writ petition.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe scope for review has been considered by this Court in<br \/>\nseveral cases. In a recent case in <a href=\"\/doc\/1325519\/\">Haridas Das v. Usha Rani<br \/>\nBanik (Smt.) and Ors.<\/a> (2006 (4) SCC 78) it was held as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;13. In order to appreciate the scope of a<br \/>\nreview, Section 114 of the CPC has to be read,<br \/>\nbut this section does not even adumbrate the<br \/>\nambit of interference expected of the Court<br \/>\nsince it merely states that it &#8220;may make such<br \/>\norder thereon as it thinks fit.&#8221;  The parameters<br \/>\nare prescribed in Order XLVII of the CPC and<br \/>\nfor the purposes of this lis, permit the<br \/>\ndefendant to press for a rehearing &#8220;on account<br \/>\nof some mistake or error apparent on the face<br \/>\nof the records or for any other sufficient<br \/>\nreason&#8221;.  The former part of the rule deals with<br \/>\na situation attributable to the applicant, and<br \/>\nthe latter to a jural action which is manifestly<br \/>\nincorrect or on which two conclusions are not<br \/>\npossible.  Neither of them postulate a<br \/>\nrehearing of the dispute because a party had<br \/>\nnot highlighted all the aspects of the case or<br \/>\ncould perhaps have argued them more<br \/>\nforcefully and\/or cited binding precedents to<br \/>\nthe Court and thereby enjoyed a favourable<br \/>\nverdict.  This is amply evident from the<br \/>\nexplanation in Rule 1 of the Order XLVII which<br \/>\nstates that the fact that the decision on a<br \/>\nquestion of law on which the judgment of the<br \/>\nCourt is based has been reversed or modified<br \/>\nby the subsequent decision of a superior Court<br \/>\nin any other case, shall not be a ground for the<br \/>\nreview of such judgment.  Where the order in<br \/>\nquestion is appealable the aggrieved party has<br \/>\nadequate and efficacious remedy and the<br \/>\nCourt should exercise the power to review its<br \/>\norder with the greatest circumspection. This<br \/>\nCourt in M\/s. Thungabhadra Industries Ltd.<br \/>\n(in all the Appeals) v. The Government of<br \/>\nAndhra Pradesh represented by the Deputy<br \/>\nCommissioner of Commercial Taxes,<br \/>\nAnantapur, [AIR 1964 SC 1372] held as<br \/>\nfollows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;There is a distinction which is real,<br \/>\nthough it might not always be<br \/>\ncapable of exposition, between a<br \/>\nmere erroneous decision and a<br \/>\ndecision which could be<br \/>\ncharacterized as vitiated by &#8220;error<br \/>\napparent&#8221;.  A review is by no means<br \/>\nan appeal in disguise whereby an<br \/>\nerroneous decision is reheard and<br \/>\ncorrected, but lies only for patent<br \/>\nerror.  Where without any elaborate<br \/>\nargument one could point to the<br \/>\nerror and say here is a substantial<br \/>\npoint of law which states one in the<br \/>\nface and there could reasonably be<br \/>\nno two opinions entertained about<br \/>\nit, a clear case of error apparent on<br \/>\nthe face of the record would be<br \/>\nmade out.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\tEven if it is accepted as contended that the plea was<br \/>\ntaken regarding limitation, the same was really not specifically<br \/>\ntaken. There was no reference to Section 11-A of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLearned counsel for the appellants contended that there<br \/>\nwas no necessity referring to that provision as indirectly that<br \/>\nplea had been taken. Though the contention was not very<br \/>\nhappily worded it is stated that this Court in several cases has<br \/>\nheld that if there is a bona fide doubt the extended period of<br \/>\nlimitation available under Section 11A of the Act does not<br \/>\napply. There is no quarrel with this proposition. But the<br \/>\nquestion is whether such a plea was in fact urged. From a<br \/>\nreading of the order of the High Court and the counter affidavit<br \/>\nfiled before this Court in which it has been specifically urged<br \/>\nat paragraphs 9 and 10 that no such argument was advanced,<br \/>\nwe do not consider this to be a fit case where any interference<br \/>\nis called for, considering the limited scope of review.\n<\/p>\n<p>The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to<br \/>\ncosts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007 Author: . A Pasayat Bench: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, Tarun Chatterjee CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 804 of 2005 PETITIONER: S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. and Anr RESPONDENT: Union of India and Ors DATE OF JUDGMENT: 27\/02\/2007 BENCH: Dr. ARIJIT [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-230555","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2007-02-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-02T17:03:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-02-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-02T17:03:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1594,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007\",\"name\":\"S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-02-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-02T17:03:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-02-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-02T17:03:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007","datePublished":"2007-02-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-02T17:03:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007"},"wordCount":1594,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007","name":"S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-02-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-02T17:03:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-n-s-minerals-ltd-and-anr-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-27-february-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"S.N.S. (Minerals) Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 27 February, 2007"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230555","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=230555"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230555\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=230555"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=230555"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=230555"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}