Condonation of delay and preservation of seized gold were upheld where diligence was shown and merits review was pending.

Delay in filing an appeal may be condoned where the appellant acted diligently, arranged the filing fee, and the lapse arose from the counsel's office misplacing the papers during a shift; the refusal to condone such delay was held unsustainable. Interim protection over seized gold was continued pending disposal of the appeal because prior restraint was necessary to preserve the subject matter until the Tribunal decided the matter on merits. The order refusing condonation was set aside, the matter was remitted to the Tribunal for merits consideration, and interim restraint on minting the gold remained in force.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal should be condoned; (ii) whether the interim restraint on minting the seized gold should continue pending disposal of the appeal.

Issue (i): Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal should be condoned.

Analysis: The delay was occasioned after the appeal papers were entrusted to counsel, the institution fee had already been arranged, and the papers were misplaced when the counsel's office shifted. The materials indicated diligence on the part of the appellant and that the lapse, if any, arose from circumstances attributable to the counsel's office rather than any lack of bona fides by the appellant.

Conclusion: The delay ought to have been condoned, and the refusal to condone it was unsustainable.

Issue (ii): Whether the interim restraint on minting the seized gold should continue pending disposal of the appeal.

Analysis: A previous direction of the Court had restrained minting of the seized gold unless it had already been melted, and the same protection was considered necessary to preserve the subject matter of the appeal until the Tribunal decided the matter on merits.

Conclusion: The interim restraint was ordered to continue pending disposal of the appeal.

Final Conclusion: The order refusing condonation was set aside and the matter was sent back to the Tribunal for disposal of the appeal on merits, with interim protection maintained in respect of the seized gold.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the appellant has acted diligently and the delay in filing an appeal is attributable to the counsel's office, the delay should ordinarily be condoned so that the matter may be decided on merits.

---