9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 912X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is 180 days, which is quite sufficient. It is unfortunate that during the aforesaid period, the appeal could not be properly prepared and filed. The reason given in the application are not supported by any documents and affidavit. Therefore, the same cannot be accepted. - In paragraph 6 of the application it is stated that appeal was presented before the Registry on 20.02.2006, which is wrong. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... affidavit in support of the averments made in the application under section 5 of Limitation Act has not been filed. The recall application No. 126999 of 2010 dated 28.04.2010 was filed. The said application was dismissed in default on 17.09.2010. Further restoration application No. 225022 of 2011 has been filed. On 09.01.2014 both restoration applications No. 225022 of 2001 and 126999 of 2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... averments made in the application, which is not supported by affidavit. On perusal of averments made in the application, it reveals that it is a case of negligence and latches on the part of the office of the Union of India and on the part of the office of Assistant Commissioner as well. The limitation for filing appeal is 180 days, which is quite sufficient. It is unfortunate that during the afo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
