2013 (10) TMI 576 - AT - Customs

Application for Modification of Stay Order non compliance of stay order - Held that - Application for modification of stay order does not raise any new grounds nor does it say how there was an error while passing the order of pre-deposit - It was only stated that the applicant was only bread earner in the family and due to unavoidable circumstances appellant could not appear before the Tribunal - There was also no evidence annexed with the application for modification nor in the appeal memoranda about the financial hardship being faced by the applicant - In the absence of any such evidences, we find that applicant had not made out any case for modification of stay order which directed the applicant to deposit an amount of Rs. One lakh and report compliance. Accordingly, the modification application is dismissed - the modification application was rejected and there being no compliance of the stay order, we dismiss the appeal for non-compliance.

Summary

Issues: Application for modification of stay order and appeal dismissal for non-compliance.

Analysis:

1. Application for Modification of Stay Order:
The judgment pertains to an application filed for the modification of a stay order that directed the appellant to pre-deposit a specific amount for the appeal to be heard and disposed of. Despite the absence of the applicant during the proceedings, the tribunal decided to consider the application due to the narrow scope of the issue involved. Upon reviewing the application and hearing the departmental representative, it was noted that the grounds for modification did not present any new arguments or demonstrate any errors in the original order. The applicant's claim of being the sole breadwinner and facing financial difficulties was not supported by any evidence attached to the application or appeal memoranda. Consequently, the tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish a case for the modification of the stay order, which led to the dismissal of the modification application.

2. Appeal Dismissal for Non-Compliance:
As a result of dismissing the modification application and the lack of compliance with the initial stay order requiring the pre-deposit, the tribunal proceeded to dismiss the appeal for non-compliance. The decision to dismiss the appeal was based on the failure of the applicant to adhere to the directives of the stay order, which mandated the deposit of a specified amount and reporting compliance. The tribunal's ruling to dismiss the appeal underscores the importance of complying with court orders and the consequences of failing to meet the prescribed obligations within the legal framework.

In conclusion, the judgment highlights the significance of providing substantive evidence and valid grounds when seeking modifications to court orders and emphasizes the necessity of compliance with judicial directives to ensure the orderly progression of legal proceedings.