Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the impugned order could be set aside subject to the appellant making payment of Rs. 1.05 crores to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund within the stipulated time, and whether the bank guarantee furnished by the appellant was liable to be released upon such compliance.
Analysis: The parties sought disposal on the same course adopted in a connected matter. The appellant undertook to pay Rs. 1.05 crores without prejudice and without admitting liability, and the respondent did not object to the adoption of that course. The arrangement was accepted as a basis for giving quietus to the controversy, with the safeguard that non-compliance would result in dismissal of the appeals and recovery of the penalty amount in accordance with law. The order also provided for release of the bank guarantee upon proof of payment.
Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside subject to the appellant depositing Rs. 1.05 crores within eight weeks and proving such payment, failing which the appeals would stand dismissed. Upon compliance, the respondent was required to release the bank guarantee within four weeks.