Pre-deposit recall refused, but instalment compliance and extended time were allowed in limited relief.

A request to recall or review a stay order directing pre-deposit was rejected because no fresh material was shown to justify interference with the earlier determination, and the Tribunal found no basis to reopen the substantially reduced pre-deposit already ordered. The plea based on financial hardship did not warrant recall or modification on the existing record. However, in the interest of justice, limited relief was granted by allowing compliance with the ordered pre-deposit in monthly instalments and by extending time for the individual applicants to make the deposit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the stay order directing pre-deposit required recall or modification on the ground of financial hardship and other stated grounds, and whether time could be granted to make the ordered pre-deposit in instalments.

Analysis: The application for recall or review was examined against the material already considered when the stay order was passed. The record did not disclose any fresh material justifying interference with the earlier view. The pre-deposit had already been scaled down substantially in the stay order, and the Tribunal found no merit in reopening that determination. At the same time, in the interest of justice, limited further indulgence was granted by permitting compliance with the ordered pre-deposit in monthly instalments and by extending time for the individual applicants concerned.

Conclusion: The request for recall or review was rejected, but the order was modified to permit deposit in instalments and to extend time for compliance.

---