ORDER
K. Gopal Hegde, Member (J)
1. The prayer in this application is for condonation of delay in the presentation of the appeal CD (Bonn) 635/85. When this application was taken up for consideration none appeared for the applicant. Shri Senthivel appearing for the Respondent Collector submitted that there has been a delay of nearly 2 months. The only explanation given was that within the period of limitation the appeal papers were sent to the Registry, but it was not accepted as it was not presented in person or by a Registered Post. Shri Senthivel submitted that under Rule 6 of the CEGAT Rule, the presentation of the appeal could be either in person or through a Registered Post and since the appellant had not adopted either of the above modes, the Registry had rightly refused to accept and in the absence of any other cause for the delayed presentation of the appeal, the application shall have to be rejected.
2. We have considered the submission made by Shri Senthivei. Rules of procedure are not intended to hamper justice but to further justice. Though the Rule 6 contemplates of presentation of the appeal in person or through Registered Post the expression ‘in person’ should be construed liberally and if it is sent by a representative of the appellant the Registry would not be committing any irregularity much less illegality in accepting the appeal. Taking a liberal view of the matter, we condone the delay and direct that the appeal be admitted. The appellant be however notified of the defects pointed out by the Technical Officer and he be given 2 weeks’ time to rectify the defects.