9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (3) TMI 151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The present miscellaneous application is for condonation of delay of 54 days in filing the appeal. Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay, ld. Consultant appearing for the appellants, submits that the impugned order was received by them on 31-3-1999 and as such the last date for filing the appeal was 30-6-1999. He explains that there was a lay off in their factory w.e.f. 15-4-1999, which continued about two to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have a good case on merits and it has been the ratio of a number of decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court that where the merits are in favour of the appellants, delays should be condoned. 2. Countering the arguments Shri R.K. Roy, ld. JDR submits that the appellants have not produced any evidence to show that the lay off which started w.e.f. 15-4-1999 continued for two and a half months. There is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application admits that he had forgotten about the said order completely. Even in the miscellaneous application the appellants have stated that it was only during the course of cleaning of his office on 20-8-1999 that the said order came to surface. This definitely reflects upon the casual approach and the relaxed attitude of the appellants. As rightly contended by ld. JDR each and every day's del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
