2018 (4) TMI 1251 - AT - Customs

Restoration of appeal - request for adjournment by fax and speed post - Held that - It must have been an omission on the part of the Registry to place the same on the date of hearing in the appeal folders - the appellant has to be given a chance to contest the case on merits - appeal restored.

Summary

Issues: Restoration of appeal, Adjournment request not considered, Change of cause-title

Restoration of appeal:
The appellants sought restoration of an appeal that was disposed of on a specific date. The appellant had requested adjournment through fax and speed post due to the inconvenience of their Counsel, but these requests were not brought to the notice of the Bench, resulting in the appeal being disposed of without hearing the appellants. Upon perusal of records, it was found that the Registry had omitted to place the requests on the date of hearing in the appeal folders. Considering these factors, the Tribunal allowed the application for restoration, granting the appellant a chance to contest the case on merits. The appeal was listed for a hearing on a specified date, and both sides were directed to prepare for the hearing.

Adjournment request not considered:
The appellant had intimated about the inconvenience of their Counsel to appear and argue the matter on a particular date through fax and speed post. However, these requests were not brought to the notice of the Bench, leading to the appeal being disposed of without hearing the appellants. The Tribunal acknowledged this oversight and granted the appellant an opportunity to contest the case on merits by allowing the restoration of the appeal.

Change of cause-title:
The appellant filed a miscellaneous application seeking a change of cause-title, stating that the name of the appellant company is different from what was initially mentioned. The appellant provided a certificate of incorporation by the Registrar of Companies to support this claim. The Tribunal allowed the miscellaneous application for the change of cause-title based on the evidence presented by the appellant.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the restoration of the appeal, considered the oversight in not addressing the adjournment requests, and approved the change of cause-title based on the evidence provided by the appellant.