Recall jurisdiction limited by acquiescence and natural justice; no basis found to set aside the connected appeal orders.

Recall jurisdiction was confined to cases of fraud, collusion, patent lack of jurisdiction, or a clear mistake causing prejudice, and it could not be used where the grievance should have been raised earlier or where the party had acquiesced. The record showed the connected appeals were repeatedly heard together over a long period, the applicants were represented throughout, and no timely objection was made that one appeal had not been argued. Natural justice was found to have been followed, and no basis existed to recall the orders dated 19.07.2023 and 31.07.2023.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order and judgment dated 19.07.2023 and 31.07.2023 should be recalled on the ground that Company Appeal (AT) No. 87 of 2020 was not heard and that the Tribunal committed a mistake causing prejudice to the applicants.

Analysis: The Tribunal examined the record of hearing dates and found that both connected appeals were repeatedly listed and heard together over a long period, with no timely objection from the applicants that one appeal had not been argued. It further found that natural justice had been followed, the parties were represented throughout, and there was no fraud, collusion, patent lack of jurisdiction, or mistake of the Court prejudicing any party. The Tribunal also relied on the settled limits governing recall jurisdiction, namely that recall is not available where the grievance could have been raised earlier or where the party has acquiesced in the proceedings.

Conclusion: The request for recall was rejected and no ground for setting aside the orders dated 19.07.2023 and 31.07.2023 was made out.

---