9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 705X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09-Ex on 8th September, 2009 [2010 (250) E.L.T. 243 (Tribunal)]. The present applications were filed on 20th November, 2009. 2. The grounds disclosed in the applications are as under : "(i) The counsel had applied for adjournment of the hearing which was not considered and the order was passed without giving any weightage to the circumstances faced by the original respondent in utter defiance of the principles of natural justice. (ii) The provisions of Rule 40 and 41 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 lays down the inherent powers of the Tribunal for exercising control over departmental authorities in relation to all matters arising out of the exercise of the powers or the discharge of it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ken up on 13-8-08, the Tribunal proceeded to dispose of the same in the absence of the respondents after going through the records on merits. Accordingly, by the said order the appeals were allowed. Thereafter, the respondents filed an application being ROA application No. 236-237/2008 in the above appeals for restoration thereof by recall of order dated 13-8-08. In fact the order dated 13-8-08 related to the disposal of four appeals. Two other appeals were by two other Directors namely, Jagmohan Goel and Smt. Kamlesh Tayal. Those Directors have not sought for restoration of their appeals. The application filed by these appellants were heard on 2-1-2009 and were allowed and their appeals were restored to Board. Thereafter the appeals came u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... late to year of 2004. The Tribunal has already on earlier occasion having disposed of the matters on account of failure on the part of the respondents to render necessary assistance in the matter and thereafter having recalled the said order and given fresh opportunity to the respondents to put forth their case, it was expected from the respondents to ensure the appearance of their representative to argue the matters on their behalf. Infact when the matters were adjourned on the last date of hearing, it was made very clear that under no circumstances matters would be adjourned any further. The request for adjournment, therefore, is rejected." 5. Undoubtedly, the application for adjournment which was filed on 8th September, 2009 speaks ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon the facts of each case. To invoke such powers the party has to disclose necessary factual matrix, which is totally absent in the case in hand. There was neither any abuse of its process by the Tribunal in disposing of the said appeals on 8th September, 2009 nor any interference therein is called for as it would not be in the interest of justice, but, on the contrary, it would amount to abuse of its powers. 9. In the circumstances, there is no case for recalling of the said order and hence the applications are dismissed. 10. At about 12.00 noon, the Court Master presented before us a fax message by Shri Anurag Rishi, Advocate for the respondents, seeking adjournment of the matter on the ground that his father-in-law has bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
