2006 (11) TMI 483 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Joining applicant as a party to Appeal No. E/2318/06-SM; Effect of appeal on applicant's rights; Interpretation of Rule 12 of CEGAT Procedure Rules; Mis-directed applications for joining as respondent.

Analysis:
The case involved three Misc. applications seeking to join the applicant as a party to Appeal No. E/2318/06-SM on the grounds that the appeal filed by another party might affect the applicant's rights. The main contention was that several outstanding amounts of the applicant may be affected if the other party's appeal is allowed. The counsel for the appellants argued that if no order is passed against the current applicants, no appeal lies, citing Rule 12 of the CEGAT Procedure Rules.

The counsel representing the other party contended that the applicants are not affected in the absence of any grievance, and their participation in the appeal does not arise. The learned DR left the decision to the Bench, while the counsel for the appellant highlighted in the ground of appeal that the current appellant has no right to file an appeal. After considering the submissions from both sides and examining the record, the judge found that the applicants sought to be heard in Appeal No. E/2318/06, which was filed by the other party against an order that had set aside a registration certificate issued in his name. The judge noted that the proviso to Rule 12 of the CEGAT Procedure Rules does not allow the addition of any other person as a respondent. Therefore, the judge deemed the applicants' applications as mis-directed and mis-placed, advising them to explore other legal remedies available. Consequently, all three applications were dismissed as not maintainable.

The order was dictated and pronounced in the Open Court on 28-11-2006.