In this notice of motion, the Central Railway sought condonation of an 1190-day delay in setting aside a Prothonotary Order rejecting its appeal due to non-removal of objections. The Court rejected the explanation of being unaware and negligence, dismissing the motion.
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.
10-NMA-742-18.doc
Sharayu Khot .
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 742 OF 2018 IN
CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO. 372 OF 2014
Deputy Chief Manager (Printing & Stationery) …Applicant/ Central Railway Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise & …Respondent Customs
Mr. R.V. Desai, Senior Counsel, a/w Ms. Sangeeta Yadav, for the Applicant/Appellant.
Mr. Sham Walve, for the Respondent.
CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.
DATE : 25 October 2018
ORDER :
1 / 4
October 25, 2018
10-NMA-742-18.doc
making this Application to set aside the order dated 5th February 2015 passed by the Prothonotary & Senior Master. The above order dated 5th February 2015 passed under Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules reject the appeal for non removal of office objections.
2 / 4
October 25, 2018
10-NMA-742-18.doc
immediately thereafter, the Applicant took out this Motion in June 2018. Thus, it is prayed that this Motion be allowed.
3 / 4 October 25, 2018
10-NMA-742-18.doc
the general benefit of the community at large, because the object is that every legal remedy must be alive for a legislatively fixed period of the time. This can of course be disturbed, if there is an acceptable explanation for the delay which we are of the view is not offered in the present facts.
[RIYAZ I. CHAGLA J.] [M.S. SANKLECHA, J.]
4 / 4 October 25, 2018
3 issues framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay of 1190 days in filing a motion to set aside an order rejecting an appeal is warranted.
Whether the explanation of reliance on a retired officer and accidental discovery of files after three years satisfies the requirements for condonation of delay.
Whether the application to remove the limitation-bar should be allowed or dismissed on the ground of negligence.
Deputy Chief Manager (Printing & Stationery) / Central Railway
Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs
M.S. Sanklecha
Riyaz I. Chagla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
