9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent :Mr.T.Pramodkumar Chopda O R D E R Heard Thiru.S.Murugappan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Thiru.T.Pramodkumar Chopda, for the respondents. 2. With the consent of both the sides, the Writ Petition is taken up for disposal. 3. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is challenging the order passed by the first respondent, appellate authority, rejecting the appeal filed by the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the first respondent for rejecting the appeal is perfectly justified. The Act does not confer power on the Appellate Authority to condone the delay beyond the period of thirty days. In fact, there are decisions of this Court as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court stating that this Court should not embark upon such exercise when outer time limit has been fixed in a statute. Though this has been th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment Standing counsel, this order should not be treated as a precedent, as it has been passed considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 7. The Writ Petition is allowed. There is no order as to costs. Consequently, W.P.M.P.No23828 of 2005 stands closed. 8. The delay in filing the appeal stands condoned. The first respondent is directed to consider the appeal, on merits and in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
