SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(Mad) 88

S.JAGADEESAN
Uma Mercantile Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Customs Excise Gold Appellate Tribunal – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:Sanjay Agarwal, S. Murugappan, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The Order of the Court is as follows :-

The petitioner has filed this writ petition for the issue of a writ ofmandamus, directing the first respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner herein against the order of the second respondent within the time fixed by this court. The only contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that if the fine as well as the penalty are paid and the goods are to be taken delivery by the petitioner, then the petitioner's request for the expert opinion cannot be complied with. As the petitioner has requested the original authority to seek for the expert opinion in case of doubt and the original authority having failed to consider this aspect, now the petitioner seeks an early disposal of the appeal after getting the expert opinion.

2.I perused the order of the Appellate Tribunal, dated 2-7-1998 wherein the Appellate Tribunal has noticed that this is not a fit case for granting early hearing especially when the appeals of more than ten years are pending. I considered the reference made by the appellate Tribunal.

3.In considering the petitioner's request for early disposal of the appeal after getting the expert opinion,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top