2003 (7) TMI 431

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant. Shri A. Chopra, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - Counsel for the appellant in his letter has requested adjournment on the ground that his client has filed a civil petition in the High Court of Gujarat "which is an essential evidence in the above referred case" and on the further ground that his client is in High Court for important matter and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iled without briefing by the client. We therefore decline to adjourn. 2. There is a delay of 34 days in filing each of these appeals. They were required to be filed on or before 23-4-2003 (after common orders made in them having been communicated on 23-1-2003) and were actually filed on 28-5-2003. The reason advanced for the delay is as follows. The entire affairs of the company are looked....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the delay in filing the appeal was beyond the appellant's control. No evidence whatsoever has been cited in support of the contention that Sanjay Patil was the person solely looking after the firm. That he was the "sole responsible male member of the family" and that Sanjay's case was such that his assistance was required and that he was actually been so busy with these matters that he did not ....