1987 (9) TMI 200

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Customs, Madras, who directed the Respondent herein to redeem the lorry bearing Registration No. MDY 6579 confiscated by him on payment of a fine of Rs. 12,000/- and reduced it to Rs. 5,000/-. It appears from the records that even on the date when the Tribunal passed the order on 18-2-1986 the lorry in question was not available with the department and had been sold on 29-11-1985 , for Rs. 17,000/-. This fact of the sale was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal by the learned S.D.R. The present application has, therefore, been filed bringing this to the notice of the Tribunal for rectifying the order of the Tribunal and also seeking the direction from the Tribunal for paying a sum of Rs. 12,000/- after deducting the quantum of fine, "....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntal Representative on 20-2-1986, no application under Section 129(B)(2) of the Act was filed till August, 1987. The attitude of the department, the learned counsel contended, is deliberate, intentional, mala fide rendering it liable for damages. The learned counsel also submitted that the respondent has issued a lawyer's notice dated 28-2-1987 under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code claiming damages. 4. I have considered the submissions made before me. I should confess, it is regrettable in the extreme that the department has not chosen even to keep the learned Senior Departmental Representative informed about the alleged sale of the lorry in spite of the fact that an appeal was pending on which the learned S.D.R. and the departmen....