9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (11) TMI 220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r condonation of delay was also attached along with the appeal. 2. Shri M.K. Sohal, the learned JDR who has appeared on behalf of the appellant, pleaded that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in the late filing of the appeal. He reiterated the contentions made in the application for condonation of delay. Shri Sohal pleaded that for coming to the conclusion whether any appeal has to be filed or not processing of the file had to be done, and the file was misplaced and as such, the appeal could not be filed within the stipulated period. He has pleaded for condonation of delay. 3. Ms. Rupa Kala, the learned advocate who has appeared on behalf of the respondent, pleaded that in terms of provisions of sub-section (3) of Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rely because the party in default is the Government. It is no doubt true that whether it is a Government or a private party, the provisions of law applicable are the same, unless the Statute itself makes any distinction. But it cannot also be gainsaid that similar consideration that will be shown by courts to a private party when he claims the protection under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, should also be available to the State. In para No. 30 of the said judgment, the Hon ble Supreme Court had further observed that the sufficient cause should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when any negligence or inaction or want of bona fide is imputable to a party. Similar is the position in the case of a corpora ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ile No. N/S-Gen. 55/83 K. But the same was not easily traceable. Hence, intensive efforts were made to search the said adjudication file in all probable places and extensive enquiries conducted in all possible quarters to trace the same. Earnest efforts were continued to be made till 20th June, 1984 (i.e. the date on or before which the appeal should have been filed before the Tribunal) with the genuine belief that the adjudication file, with all its documents, would be traced out. Since the same could not be traced, the Custom House thought of filing an appeal before the Tribunal without recourse to the original record file. It may also be stated that while the search for the missing file was in full force departmentally, the importers wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion to be legal and proper. The Appellate decision if allowed to stand, will adversely affect the interests of revenue. Thus, the public interest demands that the delay may be condoned and appeal admitted. The Hon ble Tribunal may be pleased to condone the delay and admit the appeal." The main ground of the appellant for condonation of delay is misplacement of papers and inter-departmental communication. The learned advocate has cited many judgments on the subject from all angles. It is a settled law that misplacement of papers is not a sufficient cause. This view has been adopted in the following judgments :- (i) 1984 (18) E.L.T. 599 Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta. Paras No. 4 and 5 from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xpression sufficient cause cannot be considered too liberally merely because the party in default is the Government. It is no doubt true that whether it is a Government or a private party, the provisions of law applicable are the same, unless the Statute itself makes any distinction. But it cannot also be gain-said that similar consideration that will be shown by courts to a private party when he claims the protection under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, should also be available to the State. In para 30 of the said judgment, the Hon ble Court had further observed that the sufficient cause should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when any negligence or in-action or want of bona fide is imputable to a p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rnment. It is no doubt true that whether it is a Government or a private party, the provisions of law applicable are the same, unless the statute itself makes any distinction. But it cannot also be gain-said that the same consideration that will be shown by courts to a private party when he claims the protection of S. 5 of the Limitation Act should also be available to the State." Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal and Others v. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. reported in AIR 1962 SC 361 had also held that after expiry of limitation, the respondent acquires substantial right and the applicant has to explain each and every day s delay. Lastly, the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Yodogawa Ltd. reported in 1988 (38) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
