2016 (1) TMI 10

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed because of the petitioner-applicant being unwell and in the second case, it was because of the absence of the applicant from Mumbai. In both cases, the Tribunal should have realised that the petitioner-applicant is a sole proprietor. - The delay was not deliberate or intentional, but for the illness and absence from Mumbai for some business work. The petitioner cannot be said to be grossly .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... day s delay being explained which, in the given facts and circumstances, was not necessary. In one case, the delay occurred because of the petitioner-applicant being unwell and in the second case, it was because of the absence of the applicant from Mumbai. In both cases, the Tribunal should have realised that the petitioner-applicant is a sole proprietor. He had some difficulties and has genuinel .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e costs on the petitioner quantified at ₹ 5,000/- in each of these petitions, payable within two weeks from today. If these conditions are complied with and in time, then, the Tribunal to accept both the appeals, register them and decide them in accordance with law. If these conditions remain uncomplied, then, the Tribunal order should be taken to have not interfered with, but maintained and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X