9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 438X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ishnamurthy [1998 (9) TMI 602 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] to the facts of this case, this Court is inclined to accept the explanation offered by the petitioner. As observed earlier, the petitioner does not stand to gain by filing the appeal, belatedly, more so when a heavy penalty has been imposed on the petitioner. It is not the case of the second respondent that the delay is uncondonable, though it may be not for a very long period. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court the primary function of the Court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and to advance substantial justice. This Court is of the considered view that ends of justice would be met only if the delay in filing the appeal is condoned and the Tribunal is directed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner (Appeals), the petitioner filed an appeal before the first respondent Tribunal and the department also filed an appeal against the direction to dispose of the appeal without insisting upon any pre-deposit. Both appeals were disposed of by a common order on 28-8-2007, by remanding the matter to the appropriate authority to decide the case afresh. Thereupon the second respondent passed an Order-in-Original No. 1 of 2008, dated 25-3-2008, re-determining the value of the exported goods and imposing a penalty of ₹ 50,00,000/- under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act,. It is stated that, the Order-in-Original passed by the second respondent was received by the petitioner on 28-5-2008, and an appeal was filed before the first respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... public policy and it is not meant to destroy the right of parties, but to see that the parties do not resort to dilatory tactics. Normally, a person does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal belatedly. Admittedly, the delay in the instant case is not inordinate. In the affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of delay, the petitioner has stated that, they had filed the application as there was an objection from the Registry of the Tribunal and in fact there was no delay in filing the appeal after the petitioner received the copy of the Order-in-Original. It has been further stated that the petitioner had been operating its business from No. 114, Empire State Building, Ring Road, Surat, which originally belonged to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to entertain a writ petition against an order passed in miscellaneous application refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeal. 7. The Hon ble Supreme Court in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy, [2003 (228) E.L.T. 162 (S.C.)] considered the legislative intent of the law of limitation and how the Courts should approach when prayer is made for condonation of delay. At this stage, it would be beneficial to quote the observations/findings of the Hon ble Supreme Court :- 9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court. Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain limit. Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for such legal remedy for the redress of the legal injury so suffered. Time is precious and wasted time would never revisit. During the efflux of time, newer causes would sprout up necessitating newer persons to seek legal remedy by approaching the courts. So a lifespan must be fixed for each remedy. Unending period for launching the remedy may lead to unending uncertainty and consequential anarchy. The law of limitation is thus founded on public policy. It is enshrined in the maxim interest reipublicae up sit finis litium (it is for the general welfare that a period be put to litigation). Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of the parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics but seek th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opposite party for his loss. 14. In this case, explanation for the delay set up by the appellant was found satisfactory to the trial court in the exercise of its discretion and the High Court went wrong in upsetting the finding, more so when the High Court was exercising revisional jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the respondent must be compensated particularly because the appellant has secured a sum of Rs. fifty thousand from the delinquent-advocate through the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. We, therefore, allow these appeals and set aside the impugned order by restoring the order passed by the trial court but on a condition that the appellant shall pay a sum of rupees ten thousand to the respondent (or deposit it in this Court) within o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
