P J STEELS (P) LTD Vs. CESTAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard both the sides.

(2.) This writ petition is a classic example of grossest abuse of the process of law. The Adjudicating Authority fixed the dates, i.e., 19-8-2002 and 27-8-2002 for personal hearing. The petitioner did not appear. According to the petitioner, he did not receive notice of the hearing. After the final adjudication order was passed on 29-8-2002, the petitioner preferred an appeal in which an interim order was passed on 18-3-2003. The petitioner did not comply with the interim order on the same excuse that he did not receive the interim order. Thereafter, dates for hearing of appeal was fixed. The petitioner did not appear on the ground that he did not receive notices of the date of hearing. The appeal was dismissed on 30-4-2003. The petitioner applied on 1-9-2005 after more than two years for setting aside of the dismissal of the appeal. The Tribunal by the impugned order dated 17-10-2005 refused to restore the appeal.

(3.) The Tribunal has mentioned in the order, by which the restoration has been refused, that the petitioner did care to intimate his new address after the factory was taken over by U.P.F.C. and, therefore, the notices of hearing of the appeal was sent to the last known registered address.