9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 350X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Gopal Prasad, ld. Counsel arguing the application for restoration of the appeal No. C/56/99-NB filed by the Shri Harbans Singh submits that on the date of reporting compliance, the Counsel for the applicant had requested for adjournment of the case. He submits that before that date, the applicant had already filed an application for modification of stay order. He submits that this modif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... We note in the instant case compliance was to be reported on 6-1-2000. We further note that the modification application was received on 27-12-99. It was numbered but registry failed to put up the modification application before the Bench and the Bench passed the order in the absence of the modification application. 4. Since there was modification application for modifying the stay order filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mits that these points now being reiterated have been taken into consideration at the time of passing the detailed order on the stay petition filed earlier. He submits that nothing new has been brought our. Ld. DR submits that since the applicant did not comply with the stay order by depositing the amount on or before 27-12-99, therefore the applicant shall have to deposit the entire amount of pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered. There is nothing new brought out now in the modification application. Therefore the modification application is rejected. Since the applicant had not deposited the amount on or before 27-12-99, therefore in case any request is made for restoration of the appeal and hearing of appeal, it must be supported by pre-deposit of the entire amount of penalty adjudged in the adjudication order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
