TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1072X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the Rules. There is a separate Board which is prepared and duly displayed. In the age of Information Technology, parties cannot now say that they are unaware of the matters being listed. The Prothonotary & Senior Master's board and the Court's board, for at least a week if not sooner, is available to the parties. Therefore, the routine explanation of the Revenue officials that it was the duty of their advocate and they were not required to follow up the matter/case with the advocate or with the Registry would mean sheer negligence and inaction. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has clarified in several judgments that the Revenue or Government is not a special litigant and deserves no such treatment. It is as much bound by the law and rules o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t allow matters to go in default like in the present case. They are themselves to be blamed for this mess and they cannot request the Court to accept any cause as sufficient and reasonable when that is bereft of accurate particulars, and details. The statements in the affidavit-in-support are not correct. Therefore, the reasons cannot be said to be sufficient cause. - Decided against the revenue - Notice of Motion No. 860 of 2014, Central Excise Appeal (L) No. 19 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 29-2-2016 - S. C. Dharmadhikari And G. S. Patel, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Kirankumar J. Phadake For the Respondent : Mr. Sachin Chitnis i/b Ms. Padmavati Patil ORDER P. C. The Revenue has filed this application seeking condonation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. At the same time, paragraph 4 opens with a statement that the objection at serial number 4 was not noticed by the appellant after 14th February, 2013 and could not be removed in time. It is apparent that objection No.4 was notified on 13th February, 2013. 7. In paragraph 5 it is stated that the matter was listed before the Prothonotary Senior Master on 28th February, 2013, and a conditional order was passed, a copy of which is at Annexure A to the affidavit in support. 8. That order grants four weeks' time to the appellant and their advocate. If the appellant was aware that it was listed before the Prothonotary Senior Master on 28th February, 2013, then, it was its duty to have deputed somebody to appear or inform the ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sufficient cause for condoning delay and for all times and in all matters to come. If the Revenue officials feel that it is the duty of the advocate alone and they must not follow up the cases filed in the High Court, then, they ought to be realising that the assistance and sympathy uptill now shown by this Court is grossly abused. Now it is seen as a right to ignore matters which are filed and to not attend the Court or not to depute anybody to attend the Court offices so as to render the Court Registry the requisite assistance. The Revenue and the Government is the biggest litigant in Courts. It ill comes from the Government that this Court does not dispose of matters in a timely manner and delay defeats justice. First of all why there is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The deficiencies and defects in the Restoration Application were removed. That is how, though numbered in 2014, it is ready for listing in 2016. Hence, this is a conduct which we strongly disapprove and deprecate, for the Registry also has no business to entertain any request from advocates or allow them to tamper or touch the files in cases of this nature. The submission, intended to impress the Court, is that a lenient view be taken since the office objections are now removed and the stakes being high and therefore public interest is adversely affected. We are unimpressed by this. 11. The public at large is fully aware of all this and if crores of rupees are at stake, the Registry of this Court is not expected to entertain the Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
