9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 153X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to the factory address, the address of the appellant's Counsel "V.Laxmi Kumaran, Advocate, B-6/10, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029" had also been given - Though the appellants Counsel withdrew his appearance sometime in January, 2014, thus, since, January, 2014, other than the factory address of the appellant which was closed there was no address to which any directions to them regarding date of hearing could be communicated, if the appellant were really serious in pursuing the appeal they should have given the same other address for communication at which they would be available and not the address of the factory which was closed since one year prior to filing of the appeal - ppellant has not cooperated at all with the Tribunal in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to pursue this matter and that, therefore, he wants to withdraw his appearance in this case. The Tribunal vide order dated 19.12.2013 after recording this statement of the ld. Counsel for the appellant at that time, fixed this case for final hearing on 22.02.2014. The Tribunal's order also directed that in the event the appellants fail to cause appearance either personally or through their authorized representative, the matter shall be decided ex-parte. 3. On 22.01.2014, when this matter was called, none representing the appellants appeared, as a result of which, the Tribunal decided this matter after hearing the ld. DR and discussing the merits of the case and, accordingly, vide final order dated 22.01.2014, the appeals filed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasons for non-appearance of the either party to the appeal as a result of which the matter was, ex-parte, the order must be recalled for fresh hearing of the matter. She pleaded that in the case of Alfred Berg Co. (I) (P) Ltd. (Supra) Hon'ble Madras High Court has held that when the order was passed on merit without hearing the petitioner due to petitioner's non-appearance which was due to non-service of any notice of hearing the petitioner is entitled to pray for setting aside of the order passed and for hearing of the appeal on merits. She, accordingly, prayed for recall of the order dated 22.01.2014 and hearing of these appeals on merits. 5. Shri M.S. Negi, ld. DR, opposed the ROA applications pleading that when the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is the address of the factory which was given and not any other address where the appellant company had its office. It is also seen that in the memorandum of appeal, in addition to the factory address, the address of the appellant's Counsel V.Laxmi Kumaran, Advocate, B-6/10, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029 had also been given. Though the appellants Counsel withdrew his appearance sometime in January, 2014, thus, since, January, 2014, other than the factory address of the appellant which was closed there was no address to which any directions to them regarding date of hearing could be communicated, if the appellant were really serious in pursuing the appeal they should have given the same other address for communication at which t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
