{"id":72318,"date":"1996-05-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1996-05-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996"},"modified":"2015-08-01T06:51:55","modified_gmt":"2015-08-01T01:21:55","slug":"p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996","title":{"rendered":"P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; &#8230; vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; &#8230; vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: K. Ramaswamy, Faizan Uddin, G.B. Pattanaik<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nP.T.R. EXPORTS (MADRAS) PVT LTD. &amp; ORS.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE UNION OF INDIA &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t09\/05\/1996\n\nBENCH:\nK. RAMASWAMY, FAIZAN UDDIN, G.B. PATTANAIK\n\n\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t\t O R D E R<br \/>\n     These special  leave petitions  arise from the judgment<br \/>\nand order  of the  Division Bench  of the  Madras High Court<br \/>\ndated March  7, 1996  made in  writ petition  Nos. 17490 and<br \/>\nbatch and 147\/96 and batch.  The admitted facts are that the<br \/>\npetitioners are\t exporters of  readymade garments  to divers<br \/>\ncountries.   The export\t and import  is governed  by Foreign<br \/>\nTrade Development  Regulations Act, 1992.  The Government of<br \/>\nIndia, Ministry\t of  Commerce  evolved\t1992-93\t Export\t and<br \/>\nImport Policy  declaring that  the export  policy to augment<br \/>\nproductivity,  modernization   and  competitiveness  of\t the<br \/>\nIndian agriculture industry and service.  For the year 1994-<br \/>\n95, export policy for the readymade garments was notified in<br \/>\nnotification No.1  1-29-93 dated  September 4,\t1993.\t The<br \/>\npolicy classified  allotment under  heads, namely  (a)\tPast<br \/>\nPerformance  Entitlement   (for\t short,\t  &#8216;PPE&#8217;);  and\t (b)<br \/>\nManufacturer Export  Entitlement (for short, &#8216;MEE&#8217;); and (c)<br \/>\nNon-quota Exporters  Entitlement (for  short, &#8216;NQE&#8217;).\t The<br \/>\nUruguay round  of negotiations\tof the\tGATT received  final<br \/>\napproval  of   the   negotiations   incorporating   separate<br \/>\nagreements to  diverse sectors\tincluding  the\tTextile\t and<br \/>\nClothing sector.   The\tlatter is  known as the Agreement on<br \/>\nTextile and  Clothing (ATC).   Thereunder, the Government of<br \/>\nIndia  committed   to  phase-out   incentives  or  quota  by<br \/>\nDecember, 2004\tand planned  to introduce  changes in  quota<br \/>\nalso w.e.f.  January 1, 2005.  The goal thereby sought to be<br \/>\nachieved is  that an  exporter, whether\t in India or abroad,<br \/>\nwould export garments to any other part of the world without<br \/>\nany quota  restrictions for  providing right environment for<br \/>\ntextile and  clothing exporters\t to be\tready to achieve the<br \/>\ngoal.\tConsequently, new  export  policy  from\t ATC  w.e.f.<br \/>\nJanuary 1,  1996 was  introduced  withdrawing  the  previous<br \/>\npolicy referred\t to hereinbefore.  it was initially notified<br \/>\non November  28, 1995 announcing total change in the garment<br \/>\nquota policy,  the allotment  for MEE  and NQE\tsystem\twere<br \/>\nthereby totally\t withdrawn under  the new  policy.   The new<br \/>\npolicy\tenvisages   only  two\tmethods,  namely,  (i)\tPast<br \/>\nPerformance Entitlement\t (PPE) 80%;  and  (ii)\tFirst  Come,<br \/>\nFirst Serve  (FCFS) 20%.   The\tpetitioners have  challenged<br \/>\nthis change in the policy in the High Court on three grounds<br \/>\none  of\t  which\t is   promissory  estoppel   on\t  legitimate<br \/>\nexpectation.   The  High  Court\t in  the  impugned  judgment<br \/>\nnegatived all  the three  contentions,\t Thus, these special<br \/>\nleave petitions.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Shri Vaidyanathan,\t learned counsel, contended that the<br \/>\nGovernment had\tpromised to  grant MEE\tand NQE\t quotas\t for<br \/>\nthose who  upto date their quality of products by purchasing<br \/>\nnew machines  after expiry  of 5  years life  span or  given<br \/>\npromise that  all those who performed their applications MEE<br \/>\nwere  entitled\t to  NQE  quota\t and  that,  therefore,\t the<br \/>\nrespondents are\t estopped to recile from the promise made to<br \/>\nthem.\tThey cannot  act  in  a\t way  detrimental  to  their<br \/>\nlegitimate  expectations.     We   find\t no   force  in\t the<br \/>\ncontention.   It is seen that the change in the policy is as<br \/>\na result  of GAAT  agreement with all contracting countries.<br \/>\nThe quota  system  was\tavailable  to  export  garments\t and<br \/>\nclothing to  European countries, viz., U.S.A, Canada, Norway<br \/>\netc. The Government took the policy that with a view to meet<br \/>\nmore competitive  quality in  the foreign markets introduced<br \/>\nFCFS system  giving 20% of the export. PPE was provided with<br \/>\n80% of\tthe export.   The  new dynamism\t in the policy would<br \/>\nmake the  trade more  competitive and it will be in the best<br \/>\ninterest of  the country and to boost in export potentiality<br \/>\nand foreign  exchange, on account thereof MEE and NQE quotas<br \/>\nwere eliminated\t and large  allocation\twas  issued  to\t PPE<br \/>\nsystem and  rest of  20% was  marked for  FCFS\tquotas\twere<br \/>\neliminated and\tlarge\tallocation was\tissued to PPE system<br \/>\nand rest  of 20%  was marked  for FCFS\tsystem. It  was also<br \/>\npointed that  the Government encountered that MEE system was<br \/>\nbeset with  floods of  false declarations  of the productive<br \/>\ncapacity by  unscrupulous traders masquerading as exporters.<br \/>\nThough action  was being taken against persons who committed<br \/>\nfraud but  it became difficult to stop misutilisation of the<br \/>\nscheme completely.  Consequently, MEE system was eliminated.<br \/>\nThough incentives were provided under NQE system, the growth<br \/>\nof non-quota  exports was  not commensurate with the quantum<br \/>\nof quota  allocated to the scheme to encourage such exports.<br \/>\nThe idea  of permitting\t quotas obtained as incentives to be<br \/>\nsold at premium is to cross-subsidy the non-quota export and<br \/>\nthus to\t lower the  actual selling  price of the item, as an<br \/>\nindirect subsidisation\tto  the\t NQE  exporters.    But\t the<br \/>\nforeign\t buyers\t indirectly  are  constrained  to  bear\t the<br \/>\nsubsidy.   With potential  development of  the developed and<br \/>\ndeveloping  countries\tin  the\t international\tgarment\t and<br \/>\nclothing  market,   the\t foreign   buyers  preferred   other<br \/>\ncountries, instead  of purchasing  from the Indian exporters<br \/>\nto bear\t the  indirect\tsubsidy.    Resultantly,  export  of<br \/>\nclothing has  severely suffered at the 1994 end onwards. The<br \/>\nGovernment,  therefore, took policy to abolish NQE system so<br \/>\nthat the  genuine quota exporters could do business so as to<br \/>\nstop the malady and to preserve PPE and FCFS system.\n<\/p>\n<p>     In the  light of  the  above  policy  question  emerges<br \/>\nwhether the  Government is  bound by  the previous policy or<br \/>\nwhether it  can revise\tits policy  in view  of the  changed<br \/>\npotential foreign  markets and\tthe need for earning foreign<br \/>\nexchange? It  is true  that in\ta given\t set of\t facts,\t the<br \/>\nGovernment may\tin the\tappropriate case  be  bound  by\t the<br \/>\ndoctrine of  promissory estoppel  evolved in  Union of India<br \/>\nVs. Indo-Afghan\t Agencies [(1968)  2  SCR  366].    But\t the<br \/>\nquestion revolves upon the validity of the withdrawal of the<br \/>\nprevious policy\t and introduction  of the  new policy.\t The<br \/>\ndoctrine of  legitimate expectations  again requires  to  be<br \/>\nangulated thus:\t whether it  was revised  by a policy in the<br \/>\npublic interest\t or the\t decision is based upon any abuse of<br \/>\nthe power?  The power to lay policy by executive decision or<br \/>\nby legislation includes power to withdraw the same unless in<br \/>\nthe former  case, it is by malafide exercise of power or the<br \/>\ndecision or action taken is in abuse of power.\tThe doctrine<br \/>\nof legitimate expectation plays no role when the appropriate<br \/>\nauthority is  empowered to  take a  decision by an executive<br \/>\npolicy or  under law.  The Court  leaves  the  authority  to<br \/>\ndecide its  full range\tof choice  within the  executive  or<br \/>\nlegislative power.   In\t matters of economic policy, it is a<br \/>\nsettled law  that the  Court gives  the large  leeway to the<br \/>\nexecutive and the legislature.\tGranting licences for import<br \/>\nor export is by executive or legislative policy.  Government<br \/>\nwould take  diverse factors  for formulating  the policy for<br \/>\nimport or  export of  the goods\t granting relatively greater<br \/>\npriorities to  various items  in the overall larger interest<br \/>\nof the economy of the country. It is, therefore, by exercise<br \/>\nof the\tpower given  to the executive or as the case may be,<br \/>\nthe legislature is at liberty to evolve such policies.\n<\/p>\n<p>     An applicant  has no  vested right\t to have  export  or<br \/>\nimport licences\t in terms  of the  policies in\tforce at the<br \/>\ndate of\t his  making  application.    For  obvious  reasons,<br \/>\ngranting of  licences depends  upon the policy prevailing on<br \/>\nthe date  of  the  grant  of  the  licence  or\tpermit.\t The<br \/>\nauthority concerned  may be in a better position to have the<br \/>\noverall picture of diverse factors to grant permit or refuse<br \/>\nto  grant  permission  to  import  or  export  goods.\t The<br \/>\ndecision, therefore,  would be\ttaken from  diverse economic<br \/>\nperspectives which  the executive  is in  a better  informed<br \/>\nposition unless,  as we\t have stated earlier, the refusal is<br \/>\nmala fide  or is  an abuse of the power in which event it is<br \/>\nfor the\t applicant to plead and prove to the satisfaction of<br \/>\nthe Court  that\t the  refusal  was  vitiated  by  the  above<br \/>\nfactors.\n<\/p>\n<p>     It would,\ttherefore, be  clear that  grant of  licence<br \/>\ndepends upon  the policy  prevailing as\t on the\t date of the<br \/>\ngrant of  the licence.\tThe Court, therefore, would not bind<br \/>\nthe Government\twith a policy which was existing on the date<br \/>\nof application\tas per\tprevious policy.   A  prior decision<br \/>\nwould not  bind the  Government for all times to come.\tWhen<br \/>\nthe Government\tare satisfied  that change in the policy was<br \/>\nnecessary in  the public  interest, it\twould be entitled to<br \/>\nrevise the  policy and\tlay down  new policy.\t The  Court,<br \/>\ntherefore, would prefer to allow free play to the Government<br \/>\nto evolve  fiscal policy  in the  public interest and to act<br \/>\nupon the  same.\t  Equally, the\tGovernment is  left free  to<br \/>\ndetermine  priorities  in  the\tmatters\t of  allocations  or<br \/>\nallotments or  utilisation of  its finances  in\t the  public<br \/>\ninterest.   It is  equally entitled,  therefore, to issue or<br \/>\nwithdraw or modify the export or import policy in accordance<br \/>\nwith the  scheme evolved.   We,\t therefore,  hold  that\t the<br \/>\npetitioners have no vested or accrued right for the issuance<br \/>\nof permits  on the  MEE or NQE,\t nor the Government is bound<br \/>\nby its\tprevious policy.  It would be open to the Government<br \/>\nto evolve  the new  schemes and\t the petitioners  would\t get<br \/>\ntheir legitimate  expectations\taccomplished  in  accordance<br \/>\nwith either  of the  two schemes subject to their satisfying<br \/>\nthe conditions\trequired in  the scheme.   The\tHigh  Court,<br \/>\ntherefore, was\tright in  its conclusion that the Government<br \/>\nare not\t barred by  the promises  or legitimate expectations<br \/>\nfrom evolving new policy in the impugned notification.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The special leave petitions are accordingly dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; &#8230; vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996 Bench: K. Ramaswamy, Faizan Uddin, G.B. Pattanaik PETITIONER: P.T.R. EXPORTS (MADRAS) PVT LTD. &amp; ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: THE UNION OF INDIA &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09\/05\/1996 BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, FAIZAN UDDIN, G.B. [&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-72318","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>P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; ... vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996 - 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\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; ... vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996\" \/>\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=\"1996-05-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-01T01:21:55+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\\\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; &#8230; vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996\",\"datePublished\":\"1996-05-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-01T01:21:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996\"},\"wordCount\":1562,\"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\\\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996\",\"name\":\"P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; ... vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1996-05-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-01T01:21:55+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; &#8230; vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996\"}]},{\"@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":"P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; ... vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996 - 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\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; ... vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1996-05-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-01T01:21:55+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\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; &#8230; vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996","datePublished":"1996-05-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-01T01:21:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996"},"wordCount":1562,"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\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996","name":"P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; ... vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1996-05-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-01T01:21:55+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-t-r-exports-madras-pvt-ltd-vs-the-union-of-india-ors-on-9-may-1996#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt Ltd. &amp; &#8230; vs The Union Of India &amp; Ors on 9 May, 1996"}]},{"@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\/72318","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=72318"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72318\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=72318"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=72318"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=72318"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}