BANWARI LAL Vs. CEGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 4th December, 1986 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in an appeal preferred by respondents nos. 3 and 4. The Tribunal has adjourned the hearing of the appeal preferred by respondents nos. 3 and 4 till the decision of a civil suit instituted by the said respondents against the petitioner.

(2.) IT is averred that in the appeal of respondents nos. 3 and 4, in which the impugned order has been passed, the petitioner has not been impleaded as one of the respondents. The impugned order has been passed behind the back of the petitioner, though it adversely affects his rights.

(3.) IN the civil suit the point for decision is as to whether the petitioner, or respondents nos. 3 and 4 are the owners of the gold which was first confiscated and thereafter ordered to be redeemed on payment of a certain sum of money. It appears that one of the pleas taken by the petitioner is that suit is impliedly barred and, therefore, an application under order 7 Rule 11 has been made requesting the Civil Court to reject the plaint. That application is pending. The grievance is that the learned Civil Judge is not disposing of the application.