The Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property allowed the appellant to file a separate application for condonation of delay before the next hearing for appeal FPA-21/MUM/2015.
Leave granted to file a separate application for condonation of delay before the next date of hearing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY NEW DELHI
MP-78/MUM/2015 (Stay)
&
FPA-21/MUM/2015
Oyster Ship Management P. Ltd. … Appellant
Versus
The Competent Authority, Mumbai
… Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
| For the appellant | : Shri Bahar U. Barqi, Advocate |
|---|---|
| For the respondent | : Shri Ran Singh Joint Commissioner |
| CORAM | |
| JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH | : CHAIRMAN |
| SHRI KAUSHAL SRIVASTAVA | : MEMBER |
| SHRI ANAND KISHORE | : MEMBER |
ORDER
24.10.2016
FPA-21/MUM/2015
The learned counsel for the appellant states that no doubt there is no delay in filing the appeal which has been explained in appeal itself. However, he seeks to file the separate application for condonation of delay which was not filed by the appellant earlier in order to explain the grounds for delay.
Let the same be done before the next date of hearing with an advance copy to the counsel for the respondent.
FPA-21/MUM/2015
Page 1 of 2
List on 23rd January, 2017.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Kaushal Srivastava) Member
(Anand Kishore)
Member
New Delhi, 24th October, 2016
‘s’
FPA-21/MUM/2015
Page 2 of 2
Oyster Ship Management P. Ltd.
The Competent Authority, Mumbai
Manmohan Singh
Kaushal Srivastava
Anand Kishore
As recorded by the court registry
9 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
