Pre-deposit non-compliance under FEMA did not bar restoration where readiness to pay and medical hardship were shown.

Dismissal of appeals for non-compliance with the statutory pre-deposit under FEMA was interfered with where the appellant's age and serious medical condition were undisputed and readiness to deposit was shown. The Bombay HC held that, because the appeals had been closed without merits solely for non-payment of the pre-deposit and the respondent raised no objection if compliance was made, restoration on a time-bound deposit condition would serve the ends of justice. The dismissal order was quashed and the appeals were restored subject to payment of Rs. 7.5 lakhs within four weeks.

---

---

Issues: Whether the dismissal of the petitioner's appeals for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement under Section 19 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 should be set aside and the appeals restored subject to deposit.

Analysis: The petitioner's advanced age and critical medical condition, including dementia, were not controverted. The petitioner expressed readiness to deposit the requisite pre-deposit of Rs. 7.5 lakhs, and the respondent raised no objection if the statutory pre-deposit was complied with. The appeals had been closed without consideration on merits solely for non-payment of the pre-deposit. In these circumstances, interference was warranted and restoration of the appeals with a time-bound deposit condition would serve the ends of justice.

Conclusion: The dismissal order was quashed and set aside, and the appeals were directed to be restored on payment of Rs. 7.5 lakhs within four weeks.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an appeal is dismissed only for non-compliance with a statutory pre-deposit and the appellant demonstrates readiness to comply, the dismissal can be interfered with and the appeal restored subject to deposit.

---