9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that his mother had passed away. As rightly contended by the appellant that length of time, should not weigh in the minds of the Courts/tribunals, in considering the sufficiency of the cause shown, but at the same time, cause should be explanatory. The appellant is also of the view that reasons assigned are not explained in details, but considering the prejudice to be caused, in the event of dismissal of the applications filed to condone the delay and following the principles of law enunciated in the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we are inclined to condone the delay of 405 days in filing the appeal before CESTAT on condition that the appellant pays costs of a sum of ₹ 2,500/- in each of the appeals to My Lord the Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d within the stipulated time, for the abovesaid reason. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that on account of his mother's sudden demise, he could not file the appeals in time. That apart, the appellant was outside the country between 27.09.2013 and 10.02.2014. Again, he had to leave the country and he came back only on 26.07.2014. Citing the abovesaid reasons, Mr.L.J.Vengatesh, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though sufficient cause for not making the application within the period of limitation, was shown and when the Courts have consistently held that while testing the correctness of the reasons, on the sufficient cause shown, Courts have to be reasonable, pragmatic, practical and liberal in condoning t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd personal penalty of ₹ 10,37,673/- have been imposed. Certainly that said order prejudices the interest of the appellant. Though, the copy of the order is stated to have been received by the tenant of the appellant on 05.11.2013, contentions have been raised that it has been misplaced by them. The appellant has also stated that there was some dislocation of residence and his mother had passed away on 10.02.2014. Before CESTAT, the appellant has sought for condonation, citing the above as unexpected. 9. After adverting to a catena of decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Esha Battacharjee Vs. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy and Others, reported in (2013) 12 SCC 649, has broadly culled out the principles of l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss and it cannot be allowed a totally unfettered free play. 21.8. (viii) There is a distinction between inordinate delay and a delay of short duration or few days, for to the former doctrine of prejudice is attracted whereas to the latter it may not be attracted. That apart, the first one warrants strict approach whereas the second calls for a liberal delineation. 21.9. (ix) The conduct, behaviour and attitude of a party relating to its inaction or negligence are relevant factors to be taken into consideration. It is so as the fundamental principle is that the courts are required to weigh the scale of balance of justice in respect of both parties and the said principle cannot be given a total go by in the name of liberal approach. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he normal address, where the commissionerate orders being delivered to us by our tenant belatedly without knowing the important and without any intention too. Thus the receipt of order on which this appeal is in question was received by the authorised then director belatedly also the one of the main reason. 5. In the meanwhile Director Appellant's mother was also expired on 10th Feb'2014, (Death Certificate enclosed) which derails our daily activities again, also the continuous cause for this delay in filing of the appeal in question. 11. The Tribunal has observed that dislocation of residence is not a justifiable cause. But the fact remains that the appellant has contended that his mother had passed away. As rightly conte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
