AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioners have approached this Court seeking relief for restoration of his appeal, which was dismissed on the ground of failure to deposit an amount as directed by the Tribunal. That order was made on 12-5-1999 1999 (111) ELT 771 . Petition challenging that order was dismissed on 18-1-2000. The appeal itself was dismissed on 23-3-2000.
It appears that thereafter writ petition was before this Court challenging the said order, which was withdrawn with liberty to apply before the Tribunal. That application was dismissed pursuant to which, present petition.
The learned Counsel submits that the appeal was dismissed on account of inability of the petitioners to deposit the amount. It is submitted that since then petitioners have deposited an amount of Rs. 47.5 lakhs though in the petition, it has been averred that amount so deposited was Rs. 32.50 lakhs by January, 2009. The learned Counsel on instructions submits that balance amount has been paid subsequent to that. Normally speaking, extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court after such a long delay ought not to be allowed to defeat rights of Revenue, but here, considering the fact that appellants were restrained from persuading the appeal on account of non-availability of funds, in my opinion, petitioners can be allowed to prosecute the appeal subject to the following conditions:
(i) Petitioners within four weeks from today to deposit an additional amount of Rs. 15 lakhs (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Only) with the respondents. On such deposit the impugned order dated 23-3-2000 and 6-8-2007 stand set aside and the appeal be restored to the file. The Tribunal then to hear the matter on merits. In case of non-compliance, the appeal will stand dismissed.
With the above observations, writ petition stands disposed off.