AIR 2003 SUPREME COURT 1819 ::2003 AIR SCW 1270 ::2003 AIR - Kant. H. C. R. 787 ::(2003) 4 IndLD 172 ::2003 (9) SCC 1 ::(2003) 2 Scale 365 ::2003 (2) ACE 347 ::(2003) 2 KCCR 1289 ::(2003) 1 SCR 1081 (SC) ::2003 (1) SCR 1081 ::2003 (4) SLT 273 ::(2003) 2 Supreme 260 ::(2003) 4 AllIndCas 801 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Karnataka)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): V. N. Khare, Satya Brata Sinha, Ar. Lakshmanan , JJJ

Contract Act (9 of 1872) , S.72— Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , S.144— Karnataka Excise Act (21 of 1966) , S.71— Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquors) Rules (1968) , R.11(b)— Unjust enrichment - Wholesale distribution of liquor and brewery - Public Sector Undertaking (MSIL) appointed as sole Distributor - Monopoly so created vide notifications dated 13-9-1989, challenged - Conditional interim order passed by Court in SLP that in case appellants lose in final hearing compensation shall be made payable to respondent-sole Distributor (MSIL) - Appeal subsequently allowed to be withdrawn and no compensation was made to be payable to sole Distributor (MSIL) - One of appellants (Khoday Distilleries) however, did not withdraw the appeal - Khoday Distilleries case dismissed on merits and as per interim order therein appellants were made liable to pay compensation to sole Distributor (MSIL) - Appellants who withdrew appeal, however took advantage of unclear legal position and during pendency of said litigation transacted business with other wholesalers in gross violation of Rules - Instead of making supplies only through sole Distributor (MSIL) the appellants supplied liquor to wholesalers charging commission at 5% on their account - Applying doctrine of 'unjust enrichment' and 'restitution' appellants directed to pay back amount received on account of Sole Distributor (MSIL). ....