MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE returnable forthwith, Mr. Sethna waives service for the respondents. By consent petition placed on board and called out for hearing.

(2.) HEARD Counsel for the parties.

(3.) THE impugned order of the Tribunal directing the Department to hold the money realised in deposit till disposal of the appeal, is unsustainable. In this case, the petitioners have filed appeal on 6th January 1992, challenging the legality and correctness of the order of the Collector dated 5th December 1991 received on 10th December 1992. Appeal period prescribed for appeal to the tribunal is three months. In fact, petitioners have filed appeal on 6th January 1992 and also filed stay application. On 18th January 1992, petitioners applied for early hearing of the stay application and accordingly it was fixed on 17th February 1992. In the meantime, on 29th january 1992, petitioners informed the Collector that the hearing of stay application is fixed on 17th February 1992 and, therefore, pending the stay application no coercive action should be taken pursuant to the order dated 5th December 1992. Despite this application/request, it appears that Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 encashed the bank guarantee given by the petitioners on 3rd february 1992.