Bombay High Court
Siddharth Shankar Roy vs The Commissioner Of Customs C.S.I. ... on 11 October, 2018
Author: Riyaz I. Chagla
Bench: M.S.Sanklecha, Riyaz I. Chagla
nma-659-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.659 OF 2018
IN
CUSTOMS APPEAL (L) NO. 50 OF 2018
WITH
CUSTOMS APPEAL (L) NO.50 OF 2018
Siddharth S. Roy .. Applicant.
In the matter between
Siddharth S. Roy .. Appellant.
v/s.
The Commissioner of Customs,
C.S.I. Airport & Others .. Respondents.
Mr. Sandeep Satkar i/b. Susmita Lawane, for the Applicant/ Org.
Appellant.
Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly, for the Respondents.
CORAM: M.S.SANKLECHA, &
RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.
DATE : 11th OCTOBER, 2018. P.C:-
This Notice of Motion has been taken out by the Applicant, seeking condonation of delay of 2340 days in filing the accompanying Appeal from the order dated 30th August, 2011 passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal.
2 Mr. Satkar, learned Counsel in support of the Notice of Motion states that the delay in filing the Appeal was in view of the fact S.R.JOSHI 1 of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 16/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 17/10/2018 00:04:53 ::: nma-659-2018 that the Petitioner was bona fide pursuing the Writ Petition in this Court, having challenged the impugned order dated 30th August, 2011.
3 We note that the Writ Petition challenging the impugned order dated 30th August, 2011 being Writ Petition No. 2383 of 2014 was withdrawn by the Petitioner on 5 th June, 2017. This with liberty to take appropriate proceedings as available in law. Thereafter, Petitioner filed another Writ Petition being Writ Petition No. 978 of 2018, challenging the impugned order dated 30th August, 2018. This second Writ Petition was also dismissed by this Court on 29 th January, 2018, inter alia, recording the fact that the earlier Petition was withdrawn to take such proceedings as are available in law, and therefore, filing a Writ Petition, challenging the same order was completely mis-conceived in law. It is after the rejection of the second Writ Petition, that the Petitioner has filed this application, seeking condonation of 2340 days delay in filing the appeal. There is no explanation whatsoever offered for the delay in challenging the order dated 30th August, 2011 in filing Writ Petition in 2014.
4 The above facts clearly bring out the negligence on the part of the Applicant to challenge the order dated 30 th August, 2011 by the Tribunal 5 Accordingly, Notice of Motion is dismissed.
6 Consequently, Appeal also dismissed as infructous.
(RIYAZ I. CHAGLA,J.) (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.)
S.R.JOSHI 2 of 2
::: Uploaded on - 16/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 17/10/2018 00:04:53 :::