JUDGMENT

A.S. Oka, J. - Heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant, the Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1 and the Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2. The Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant states that a notice has been served to other respondents. We accept the said statement. The notice of motion is opposed by the Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1 and the respondent No. 2.

2. A customs appeal preferred by the applicant which was at lodging number came up before the Prothonotary and Senior Master on 6th October, 2009. A conditional order was made on that date. As the applicant could not remove office objections within the stipulated time, the appeal stood rejected in exercise of powers under Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980 (for short "the said Rules").

3. Notice of Motion No. 813/2011 was taken out by the applicant which was made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). Prayer (a) was for condonation of delay of 483 days and prayer (b) was for setting aside the order passed by the Prothonotary and Senior Master and for restoration of the appeal. Subsequently, Notice of Motion