A single-paragraph order dismissing a writ miscellaneous petition seeking modification of a previous order, directing the petitioner to pursue remedies against the Tribunal if aggrieved by its decision.
No costs; petition closed.
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.
1
W.M.P.No.10514 of 2019 in W.P.No.18727 of 2008
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
This writ miscellaneous petition has been filed to modify the order and direction in Writ Petition No.18727 of 2008, dated 03.12.2014.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court
had directed the period from the date of filing the writ petition, i.e., on 04.08.2008 till the date of passing of the order, i.e., 03.12.2014 be excluded while computing the limitation while filing appeal before the CESTAT.
3.It appears that the CESTAT while entertaining the appeal
complied with the order passed by this Court and condoned the delay, but with regard to the delay which occasioned before the Commissioner (Appeals) in the first appeal, the Tribunal has now rejected the appeal petition.
4.It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that
the Tribunal has misunderstood the scope of the order and direction issued by this Court in the writ petition.
2
T.S.Sivagnanam, J.
(abr)
5.In any even, the order passed in the writ petition has worked
itself out. Therefore, if the petitioner is aggrieved, should necessarily question the order passed by the Tribunal in the manner known to law.
6.With the above observation, this petition is closed. No costs.
26.04.2019
abr
W.M.P.No.10514 of 2019
in W.P.No.18727 of 2008
T.S. Sivagnanam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
