Statutory pre-deposit compliance denied restoration of appeals and stay of detention relief

Repeated failure to comply with a statutory pre-deposit condition justified refusal to restore the appeals. The Tribunal noted that the appellants had been given successive opportunities and extensions but did not make the required deposit within time, and they sought unconditional restoration only if the detention order was withdrawn. On those facts, the request to revive the appeals and to stay the detention order was rejected, and the pre-deposit requirement was enforced.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeals dismissed for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement should be restored and whether the detention order should be stayed.

Analysis: The appellants had been granted repeated opportunities and extensions to comply with the pre-deposit directions, but failed to make the required deposits within the time allowed. The request for unconditional restoration and stay was declined, as the appellants were not willing or able to make any further deposit unless the detention order was withdrawn. The Tribunal found that the appellants had prolonged the matter for a substantial period without making substantial compliance with the statutory pre-deposit condition.

Conclusion: The request for restoration of the appeals and stay of the detention order was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The statutory pre-deposit requirement was enforced, and no relief was granted to revive the appeals or suspend the detention action.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an appellant repeatedly fails to comply with a pre-deposit condition despite successive opportunities, the appeal need not be restored and ancillary relief may be refused.

---