M/S. Shruti Synthetics Limited Vs. Cce, Jaipur - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

1. arguing the applications for restoration of the appeals, shri upendera sharma, ld. advocate submits that under the instruction of his senior on the date fixed for hearing, he had booked a ticked of bus. he submits that the bus could not reach in time in delhi, as the court was only for the half day and as he reached the court, the court had risen for the day. he submits that in support of his contention, he had filed as sworn in affidavit. he, therefore prays that in the circumstance, the appels may be restored.2. shri k.panchatcharam, ld. jdr leaves the matter to the discretion of the bench.3. i have heard the submission of the ld. counsel for the appellant. i find that the delay in reaching the tribunal was beyond the control of the counsel. in the circumstances, the request for restoration of the appeal is allowed. the appeal should now come up for hearing on 2.4.2001.

Judgment:

1. Arguing the applications for restoration of the appeals, Shri Upendera Sharma, ld. Advocate submits that under the instruction of his Senior on the date fixed for hearing, he had booked a ticked of bus. He submits that the bus could not reach in time in Delhi, As the court was only for the half day and as he reached the Court, the court had risen for the day. He submits that in support of his contention, he had filed as sworn in affidavit. He, therefore prays that in the circumstance, the appels may be restored.

2. Shri K.Panchatcharam, ld. JDR leaves the matter to the discretion of the Bench.

3. I have heard the submission of the ld. Counsel for the appellant. I find that the delay in reaching the Tribunal was beyond the Control of the Counsel. In the circumstances, the request for restoration of the appeal is allowed. The appeal should now come up for hearing on 2.4.2001.