2015 (1) TMI 583

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Appellant. Shri S.P. Bharati i/b & Ms. Anamika Malhotra, for the Respondent. ORDER We have heard Mr. Prakash Shah appearing on behalf of the Appellants and Mr. Bharati appearing on behalf of the Respondents. 2. The Appellant is aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, dated 6th July, 2013 refusing to restore Appeal No. E-1344, 1344 of 2000 arising out of the order of original dated 26....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er of one firm M/s. M.M. Furniture from 1st January, 1987 to 3rd December, 2009. The firm stopped its business activities and since 2003 there was no transaction. He recollected of the appeal having filed but stated in paragraph 4 of affidavit that the firms' premises were closed as the firm stopped the business. The partner Manoharlal Mishra died on 12th May, 2008 and subsequent to his death his ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....led by the appellants and a notice for hearing was issued on the address given in the appeal memorandum. Inspite of the notice, none appeared hence the appeals were dismissed vide order, dated 9-12-2009 and the order was also despatched on the address given in the appeal memorandum and the order so despatched was not received back unserved. In view of this, the presumption is that the order was re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... merits?" 9. With the consent of both Advocates we are disposing of these appeals finally. Once we find that the Tribunal adopted a hyper-technical approach and which was uncalled for and unjustified then the impugned order cannot be sustained. The Tribunal was in error in refusing to restore the appeals and which are pending from the year 2000 on its file. The litigant and his advocate is e....