{"id":38242,"date":"1990-11-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1990-11-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990"},"modified":"2017-09-29T20:52:12","modified_gmt":"2017-09-29T15:22:12","slug":"priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990","title":{"rendered":"Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And &#8230; vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And &#8230; vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1991 AIR  583, \t\t  1990 SCR  Supl. (3) 138<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: N Kasliwal<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Kasliwal, N.M. (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nPRIYANKA OVERSEAS PVT. LTD. AND ANR.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:<\/pre>\n<p>UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.\n<\/p>\n<p>DATE OF JUDGMENT15\/11\/1990<\/p>\n<p>BENCH:\n<\/p>\n<p>KASLIWAL, N.M. (J)<br \/>\nBENCH:\n<\/p>\n<p>KASLIWAL, N.M. (J)<br \/>\nSINGH, K.N. (J)<\/p>\n<p>CITATION:\n<\/p>\n<pre> 1991 AIR  583\t\t  1990 SCR  Supl. (3) 138\n 1991 SCC  Supl.  (1) 102 JT 1990 (4)\t490\n 1990 SCALE  (2)1028\n\n\nACT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>     Customs  Act, 1962&#8211;Sections 26, 60,  68,\t112(a)&#8211;Palm<br \/>\nKernel-Import  of&#8211;Whether  permissible&#8211;Duty  payable&#8211;What<br \/>\nis.\n<\/p>\n<p>HEADNOTE:\n<\/p>\n<p>     The  appellant company made a contract on 10.6.87\twith<br \/>\nthe  foreign suppliers to import under Open General  Licence<br \/>\n35,000\tMT  of\t&#8220;Palm  Kernel&#8221;.\t Under\tthe  above  contract<br \/>\n10681.832  MT  of palm kernel was shipped  from\t Nigeria  on<br \/>\n26.6.87\t and  25.7.87 under different bills of\tlading.\t The<br \/>\ngoods  arrived in the territorial waters of India  on  2\/3rd<br \/>\nOctober, 1987.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Prior  to 27.7.1987 import of palm seeds was  canalised<br \/>\nunder the Import Policy for the years 1985-88. On  27.7.1987<br \/>\nthe  Chief Controller of Imports &amp; Exports issued  a  Public<br \/>\nNotice\tcanalising import of &#8220;any other material from  which<br \/>\noil can be extracted&#8221; also.\n<\/p>\n<p>As the appellant was apprehending some dispute on the import<br \/>\nof  palm kernel, it filed a writ petition in the High  Court<br \/>\non 28.7.87, and the learned Single Judge passed two  interim<br \/>\norders.\t On appeal against these orders, the Division  Bench<br \/>\non 2.12.87 set aside the interim orders with the consent  of<br \/>\nthe parties and expedited the proceedings already  initiated<br \/>\nunder section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 for\tconfiscation<br \/>\nof the goods.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The  Collector of Customs by adjudication order  passed<br \/>\non 7.12.1987 held that the item &#8220;Palm Kernel&#8221; was a  prohib-<br \/>\nited  item  for import except through  canalisation  by\t the<br \/>\nState Trading Corporation in terms of the Import Policy and,<br \/>\nconsequently  its  import  without a valid  licence  was  in<br \/>\ncontravention  of  the provisions of the Customs  Act,\t1962<br \/>\nread  with the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947.\t The<br \/>\nCollector  in these circumstances directed-the\tconfiscation<br \/>\nof  the\t entire goods but gave an option  to  the  appellant<br \/>\ncompany\t to  redeem the goods on payment of  fine  of  Rs.90<br \/>\nlacs.  The Collector also imposed a personal penalty on\t the<br \/>\nappellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>The customs duty as applicable on the date of the arrival of<br \/>\nthe<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">139<\/span><br \/>\nships,\ti.e. 2\/3rd October, 1987 was 105%. The said  customs<br \/>\nduty was withdrawn on 4.12.87 and as such there was nil duty<br \/>\non palm Kernel, and this position remained upto 28.1.88. The<br \/>\nexemption  from\t customs  duty was  however  withdrawn\tfrom<br \/>\n29.1.88\t as a result of which the earlier duty of 105%\tcame<br \/>\ninto  effect.  The customs duty was further  increased\tfrom<br \/>\n1.3.88 and the new customs duty was at 245%.<br \/>\n    The appellant company removed 3935.364 MT of Palm Kernel<br \/>\non  17.12.87 by paying proportionate amount of\tpenalty\t and<br \/>\nnil  customs duty. The appellant then filed bills  of  entry<br \/>\nfor the remaining 6746.468 MT of Palm Kernel on 28.1.88\t but<br \/>\ndid not depoit the redemption fine.\n<\/p>\n<p>    On\tmerits, the learned Single Judge by his order  dated<br \/>\n19.4.88 held that the Palm Kernel was an item different\t and<br \/>\ndistinguished from Palm seeds, and the same could be import-<br \/>\ned  under OGL as R was covered under item no. 1, Appendix  4<br \/>\nof the Import Policy. Accordingly, the learned Judge ordered<br \/>\nthe  goods to be cleared on payment of such duties  as\twere<br \/>\nleviable on 28.1.88, when the appellant had entered the bill<br \/>\nof entry seeking clearance of the goods.<br \/>\n    The Division Bench on. appeal affirmed the order of\t the<br \/>\nTrial Court in so far as the setting aside of the  adjudica-<br \/>\ntion  order was concerned. The Division Bench  however\theld<br \/>\nthat the appellant shall be entitled to get delivery of\t the<br \/>\nbalance\t goods on payment of duty at the rate prevailing  in<br \/>\nOctober, 1987.\n<\/p>\n<p>Both  the parties preferred appeal before the Court by\tspe-<br \/>\ncial<br \/>\nleave,<br \/>\n    Before  the Court it was inter alia contended on  behalf<br \/>\nof the appellant company that (i) Palm seed and Palm  Kernel<br \/>\nwere two different items as shown in the commercial transac-<br \/>\ntions  in the trading community and Palm seeds alone  was  a<br \/>\ncanalised  item; (ii) a fiscal statute had to  be  construed<br \/>\nstrictly  and  in favour of a citizen  especially  when\t the<br \/>\nquestion  of imposing fine and penalties was  involved,\t and\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii)  the  Palm Kernel having been shipped by\tthe  foreign<br \/>\nseller\tfrom Nigeria on or before 27.7.87 the appellant\t was<br \/>\nlegally entitled to import the same under the OGL.<br \/>\n    It\twas further contended that the rate of duty  of\t the<br \/>\nimported  goods,  as provided in section 15 of\tthe  Customs<br \/>\nAct,  1962 shall be the rate and valuation in force, in\t the<br \/>\ncase of goods cleared from a warehouse under section 68,  on<br \/>\nthe date on which the goods were actu-\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">140<\/span><\/p>\n<p>ally  removed  from the warehouse, and\tthe  Division  Bench<br \/>\ncommitted error in holding that the date for actual  removal<br \/>\nof the goods in the present case shah be considered as 2\/3rd<br \/>\nOctober, 1987 when the goods entered the territorial  waters<br \/>\nof  India; that irrespective of the physical removal of\t the<br \/>\ngoods from the warehouse, the goods would be deemed to\thave<br \/>\nbeen actually removed in law on 28.1.88 when the  petitioner<br \/>\nhad  filed ex-bond bills of entry seeking clearance  of\t the<br \/>\ngoods; in the facts and circumstances of this case the\tterm<br \/>\n&#8216;actual\t removal&#8217;  used in section 15(1)(b) could  not\tmean<br \/>\nphysical  removal  as the same was made\t impossible  by\t the<br \/>\nwrongful  act of the respondents; and it should be  given  a<br \/>\nmeaning in the juristic sense as deemed removal.<br \/>\n    On behalf of the Revenue, it was contended that (i)\t the<br \/>\ndistinction  sought  to be made between\t &#8216;Palm\tKernel&#8217;\t and<br \/>\n&#8216;Palm  Seed&#8217; was artificial; (ii) the appellant had  clearly<br \/>\nunderstood the Import Policy and was fully aware of the fact<br \/>\nthat Palm Kernel was a canalised item and still it  imported<br \/>\nthe  same  under  the OGL; (iii) the appellant\thad  let  no<br \/>\nevidence to show that the &#8216;Palm Kernel&#8217; and &#8216;Palm seed&#8217; were<br \/>\nconsidered as two different commodities in the popular sense<br \/>\nin  commerce  or trade. As regards the question of  levy  of<br \/>\nduty, it was contended that in the matter of taxation  there<br \/>\nwas no question of applying any principles of equity or\t the<br \/>\ndeeming\t fiction  in construing the  provisions\t of  section<br \/>\n15(1)(b)  of  the  Customs Act; even if\t the  appellant\t had<br \/>\nentered\t the bill of entry on 28.1.88, admittedly the  goods<br \/>\nwere not actually removed on that date and the hiatus if any<br \/>\nin  actual removal, could not be extended to  an  artificial<br \/>\ndate.\n<\/p>\n<p>    In\tthe alternative it was contended that the  appellant<br \/>\nfully  knowing that the rate of duty in October,  1987\twhen<br \/>\nthe  goods  had arrived in India was 105% and  even  if\t the<br \/>\ndeeming\t provision for removal of the goods was applied\t for<br \/>\nthe purpose of section 15(1)(b) of the Customs Act, then the<br \/>\ndate of actual removal should be 2\/3rd October, 1987.<br \/>\n    Dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue and  allowing<br \/>\nthe appeal filed by the appellant company the Court,<br \/>\n    HELD:  (1)\t&#8220;Palm Kernel&#8221; is not included  in  the\titem<br \/>\n&#8220;Palm  Seeds&#8221;,\tand  the two commodities  are  different  as<br \/>\nunderstood in commerce or trade. [155H-156A]<br \/>\n    (2)\t Prior to 27.7.87 &#8216;Palm Kernel&#8217; was not a  canalised<br \/>\nitem, the High Court rightly held that &#8216;Palm Kernel&#8217; was not<br \/>\nincluded within the entry of &#8216;Palm seed&#8217;. The Government  of<br \/>\nIndia itself realised the dif-\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">141<\/span><\/p>\n<p>ference\t in  the two commodities, therefore it\tamended\t its<br \/>\nprevious policy.[156D]<br \/>\n    (3)\t As the Palm Kernel was not a canalised item  before<br \/>\n27.7.87,  it could have been imported under the\t OGL  before<br \/>\nthat date. The crucial dates in this regard are 26.6.87\t and<br \/>\n25.7.87 when the goods were actually loaded in the Ship\t and<br \/>\nnot  the  date\tof arrival of the ship\tin  the\t territorial<br \/>\nwaters of India. [156F]<br \/>\n    (4)\t Since &#8216;Palm Kernel&#8217; was not included  within  &#8216;Palm<br \/>\nseed&#8217; the Customs authorities had no legal justification  to<br \/>\nconfiscate or impose redemption fine or penalty. [156E]<br \/>\n    (5) Section 15 of the Customs Act provides for  determi-<br \/>\nnation\tof rate of duty on imported goods. The rate of\tduty<br \/>\nand  tariff  valuation, if any, applicable to  any  imported<br \/>\ngoods, shall be the rate and valuation in force in the\tcase<br \/>\nof goods cleared from a warehouse under section 68, the date<br \/>\non which the goods are actually removed from the  warehouse.<br \/>\n[158C-D]<br \/>\n    (6)\t One cannot introduce the concept of deeming  provi-<br \/>\nsion while determining the question of actual removal of the<br \/>\ngoods  from the warehouse. The rate has to be determined  on<br \/>\nthe  basis of the date on which goods are  actually  removed<br \/>\nfrom  the  warehouse and thereafter the\t question  would  be<br \/>\nexamined as to how the relief is to be moulded in case it is<br \/>\nfound that the Customs authorities were themselves responsi-<br \/>\nble in preventing the importer of goods from actually remov-<br \/>\ning the goods from the warehouse. [158E-F]<br \/>\n    <a href=\"\/doc\/582733\/\">Duni Chand Rataria v. Bhuwalka Brothers,<\/a> [1955] 1 S.C.R.<br \/>\n1071;  <a href=\"\/doc\/690714\/\">M\/s. Bharat Surfactants Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of  India,<\/a><br \/>\n[1989] 4 S.C.C. 21; distinguished.\n<\/p>\n<p>    <a href=\"\/doc\/547717\/\">Commissioner  of  Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh\t v.  Jaswant<br \/>\nSingh Charan Singh,<\/a> [1967] 2 S.C.R. 720 referred to.<br \/>\n    (7)\t The  statutory principle is that if  a\t party\tdis-<br \/>\ncharges\t its liability by complying with the requirement  of<br \/>\nlaw,  and  presents  papers for clearance of  goods,  it  is<br \/>\nobligatory  on\tthe Revenue authorities to  pass  the  order<br \/>\nimmediately  thereon.  If  the\tRevenue\t authorities  either<br \/>\nrefuse\tto  pass the order on some  erroneous  or  imaginary<br \/>\ngrounds\t or  on\t account of any misconception  of  law,\t the<br \/>\nDepartment cannot take advantage of its own wrong in demand-<br \/>\ning higher rate of duty from the importer. [162D-E]<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">142<\/span><br \/>\n    (8) Admittedly, the appellant had done its part of legal<br \/>\nduty by presenting bills of entry and complying with section<br \/>\n68(a) of the Act on 28.1.88. But the Customs Officer refused<br \/>\nto release the goods on erroneous assumption that the appel-<br \/>\nlant was liable to pay redemption fine and since it had\t not<br \/>\npaid  the said amount, the goods were not liable to  be\t re-<br \/>\nleased.\t In  the  circumstances, the  Department  cannot  be<br \/>\nallowed to take advantage of its own wrongful act. [162F-G]<br \/>\n    (9)\t In  moulding relief, the Court has  always  applied<br \/>\nprinciples of equity in order to do complete justice between<br \/>\nthe  parties.  The appellant is therefore  entitled  to\t the<br \/>\ndelivery  of goods without paying any duty as on 28.1.88  no<br \/>\nduty was payable on the goods. [162H, 164E]<\/p>\n<p>JUDGMENT:<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And &#8230; vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990 Equivalent citations: 1991 AIR 583, 1990 SCR Supl. (3) 138 Author: N Kasliwal Bench: Kasliwal, N.M. (J) PETITIONER: PRIYANKA OVERSEAS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT15\/11\/1990 BENCH: [&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-38242","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>Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And ... vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990 - 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\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And ... vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990\" \/>\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=\"1990-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-29T15:22:12+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\\\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And &#8230; vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990\",\"datePublished\":\"1990-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-29T15:22:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990\"},\"wordCount\":1669,\"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\\\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990\",\"name\":\"Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And ... vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1990-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-29T15:22:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And &#8230; vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990\"}]},{\"@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":"Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And ... vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990 - 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\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And ... vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1990-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-29T15:22:12+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\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And &#8230; vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990","datePublished":"1990-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-29T15:22:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990"},"wordCount":1669,"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\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990","name":"Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And ... vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1990-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-29T15:22:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/priyanka-overseas-pvt-ltd-and-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-15-november-1990#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. And &#8230; vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1990"}]},{"@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\/38242","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=38242"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38242\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=38242"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=38242"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=38242"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}