ORDER
Lajja Ram, Member (T)
1. Today the matter is listed for compliance.
Under Stay Order No. S/04/98/-D dated 20.1.98, the Tribunal had directed the appellants M/s. Marigold Papers Pvt. Ltd. to deposit a sum of Rs. 15 lakhs on or before 31.3.98. It was made clear that non-compliance will result in dismissal of the appeal. The matter was to come up for reporting compliance on 16.4.98.
2. The appellants filed petition in the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and in pursuance of the directions of the High Court, the stay was reheard on 31.12.98. Under Stay Order No 13/99-D dated 22.1.99 , in place of Rs. 15 lakhs , the appellants were directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of that order.
3. Thereafter, the appellant filed an application for modification of the revised stay order dated 21.1.99 and the matter was heard on 24.6.99 . The Tribunal took into account all the relevant facts and circumstances and did not find any merit in the request for modification but in the interest of justice, two weeks time from the date of hearing on 24.6.99, was given for compliance with the directions of the stay order of the Tribunal dated 22.1.99. In para 11 of the order, it was made clear that if the terms of the stay order dated 22.1.99 were not complied with within the period of two weeks from that date, then the stay order would be automatically vacated and the appeal shall be liable for dismissal without any further reference to the appellants. The matter was listed for reporting compliance and further order on 16.7.99.
4. Shri K. Kumar, learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that the appellants have not complied with the terms of the stay Order. They have approached the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and the High Court is hearing the matter today. He has not produced any copy of the petition filed before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court nor any Misc application for directions by the Bench. He submits that there are judgments to the effect that the stay applications/ appeals should not be dismissed mechanically and justice should be done to the appellants.
5. We find that this matter is pending for quite sometime and inspite of the modifications and extension of time, the appellants have not complied with the terms of the orders passed by the Tribunal.
6. Shri R. S. Sangia, learned DR pleads that as the terms of the stay Order has not been complied with, the appeal be dismissed.
7. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the history of the case, we find no justification for extending the period for making the compliance. As the compliance has not been made within the period stipulated, and the appellants have not complied with the terms of Section 35F of the Act, the Appeal is dismissed. The appellants are however, given liberty to pray for restoration if any orders are produced of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court to that effect. With the above observations, the stay petition appeal is dismissed.