TMI Blog1987 (4) TMI 161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 10-2-1986, filed by the appellants in support of their application for restoration of the appeal earlier dismissed by this Tribunal on 4-12-1985. According to the respondent the following averment in para 3(ii) of the said affidavit was a false averment : - As they have averred in para 3(ii) of the said affidavit that Shri J.N. Roy, Advocate was not engaged by them for causing appearance in the matter on 4-12-1985 whereas the appellants have filed a vakalatnama in favour of the said Shri J.N. Roy, which is on the records of the Hon ble Tribunal. It is also stated by the respondent in their application in hand that this Tribunal in its restoration Order No. Misc./128/1986-A dated 17-6-1986 has also stated that there was a false ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... satisfied that there is reasonable foundation for the charge -the guidelines laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of S.P. Kohli v. High Court of Punjab Haryana, AIR 1978 SC 1753. Bearing in mind these principles, we find that the respondent has not stated in his application in hand that the said statement in the affidavit was a deliberate falsehood or it was made consciously. From the records we observe that the said statement was made on account of confusion as explained by the appellants in their subsequent submissions. Moreover, we find that at the time of restoration of the appeal this very fact was brought to the notice of the Tribunal and after stating that it was a fact that Shri J. N. Roy, Advocate, had indeed been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment of such costs as may be awarded by the Tribunal." (Emphasis supplied) xx xx xx The said submission was opposed by the learned S.D.R.., but this Tribunal restored the appeal by imposing a cost of Rs. 1,000/- to be deposited into the account of the Central Revenues in the Treasury. The relevant paragraph reads as follows : However, large stakes (refund claimed in a sum of Rs. 1,35,330.31) are involved. The applicant would suffer an irreparable injury if the appeal is not restored for the acts or omissions of its officers. It is not as if the respondent could not be adequately compensated by payment of heavy costs. We accordingly direct that the applicant should within one month of the date of communication of this order pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
