2017 (11) TMI 1011

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... record it transpires that the same was served in-person. In writ jurisdiction, we cannot embark upon the disputed question of fact about the time the order was served - It would not be possible for this Court in its writ jurisdiction to embark upon an enquiry as to the time the petitioner received order-in-original and the filing of application for settlement - petition dismissed - decided agains .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... prior to adjudication. The petitioner at no material point of time had received the order of adjudication prior to the application for settlement being filed. The finding in the impugned order that the application has to be filed one day prior to the service of the order is erroneous. The statute does not lay down that the application for settlement has to be filed at least a day prior to the ord .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ve parties. 5. In case of Vishnu Steels, referred to supra, the application for settlement was filed even prior to the dispatch of the order. 6. In the present case, the order-in-original was not dispatched to the petitioner, but from the facts on record it transpires that the same was served in-person. In writ jurisdiction, we cannot embark upon the disputed question of fact about the time .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X