1999 (11) TMI 94

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rticle 226 of the Constitution of India is whether the exercise of discretionary power by the respondent No. 2 in passing the order on stay application pending the Appeal against adjudication made by respondent No. 3 is improperly, unreasonably or unjustly exercised? To which our straightway, spontaneously and clear answer is in the negative. The Appellate Authority while exercising the discretion .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t has been observed that the impugned order of the respondent No. 3 before the respondent No. 2 could not be said to be vulnerable so as to afford the benefit by reducing the amount decided towards pre-deposit under Section 35(F) of the Act. 2.It may also be stated that it is a settled proposition of law that the interim relief claimed by the party and if allowed by the Court when would tantamoun .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X