9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot differ with the finding recorded by the Tribunal because the delay is 1,103 days and the explanation offered is that some of the employees/managers have left the establishment and they did not bring to the notice of the appellant/management about the order in appeal, dated 05.03.2015. Therefore, we would have been well justified in confirming the order passed by the Tribunal in dismissing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er No. 40026 of 2019 dated 07.01.2019 in Appeal No.ST/42281/2018-SM. 2. This appeal has been filed raising the following Substantial Questions of Law: (i) Whether the tribunal had erred in dismissing the appeal filed for condonation of delay without following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Coolector, Land Acquisition Anantna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se for condonation of the delay. 5. Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan, learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the Tribunal ought to have taken note of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Esha Battacharjee Vs. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy others [reported in (2013) 12 SCC 649] and should have been adopted a liberal, pragmatic and j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been quantified at ₹ 5,38,595/-, we deem it appropriate that this is a case where discretion can be exercised for condonation of the delay. 7. We make it clear that this order shall not be treated as precedent, since this order is passed taking note of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, so as to enable the appellant to prosecute their appeal before the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
