Mandatory pre-deposit under FERA defeats appeal where the appellant ignores a conditional deposit order and shows no undue hardship.

Pre-deposit under Section 52(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 was mandatory, subject to waiver only on showing undue hardship. The appellant failed to comply with the Tribunal's conditional order to deposit the penalty amount, did not appear or secure representation, and produced no material to justify waiver or bona fide compliance. In those circumstances, the Tribunal found no equitable basis to entertain the appeal and dismissed it for non-compliance with the pre-deposit condition.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal was liable to be dismissed for failure to comply with the statutory and court-directed pre-deposit requirement.

Analysis: The appeal was subject to the pre-deposit requirement under Section 52(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, which permits waiver only where deposit would cause undue hardship. The appellant did not comply with the Tribunal's conditional order directing deposit of the penalty amount and did not appear or secure representation. No material was shown to justify waiver or to establish bona fide compliance. The mandatory nature of the statutory deposit condition, coupled with disobedience of the Tribunal's earlier order, left no equitable basis to entertain the appeal.

Conclusion: The appeal was rightly dismissed for non-compliance with the pre-deposit condition.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute makes pre-deposit mandatory subject only to waiver on undue hardship, failure to comply with a conditional deposit order justifies dismissal of the appeal.

---