KESARWANI ZARDA BHANDAR ALLAHABAD Vs. SUBHASH CHANDRA KESARWANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant. As the restoration application of the appellant has been rejected as not maintainable by Copy Right Board through impugned order dated 5.4.2011 without even issuing notice to the opposite party hence this appeal is being finally decided without issuing notice to the respondent in this appeal.

(2.) The main matter was dismissed in default by the Bench of Copy Right Board on 30.9.2010 for the absence on 28.6.2010. It is very strange that three members signed on three different dates i.e. on 13.9.2010, 14,9.2010 and 20.9.2010 and thereafter date 30.9.2010 was written at the bottom of the order. Certified copy of the order is on pages 16 and 17 of compilation.

(3.) Through the impugned order dated 5.4.2011 restoration application seeking recall of order dated 30.09.2010 dismissing the main matter in default has been rejected on the ground that Board has got no power to review. The order passed by the Copy Right Board is patently erroneous in law. It is correct that a judgment passed on merit can not be reviewed by any court or authority unless power of review is either specifically conferred or the authority which has decided the matter is a Court having plenary powers like High Court while hearing writ petitions. However, every tribunal has got inherent power to dismiss a case in default in the absence of applicant and to restore the same afterwards if sufficient cause for absence is made out vide Grindlays Bank Ltd., Vs. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal and others, 1981 AIR(SC) 606.