Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 594 (KAR)

UNION OF INDIA v. S. M. NAGARAJ

2005-09-13

ANAND BYRAREDDY

body2005
ANAND BYRAREDDY, J. ( 1 ) THERE is a delay of 122 days in riling the appeal. The contention on behalf of counsel for the appellant is that the delay is in fact less than 122 days and having regard to the fact that communication of the order of the Tribunal was in fact received in the office of the appellant only as on May 29, 2003 and the covering letter indicating the actual date of communication not being available on the date of filing of the appeal, the same is produced along with the application and that it is possible for the appellant to demonstrate that the appeal filed is in fact within 122 days. However, having regard to section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Management act, 1999, it is clear that this court would not have jurisdiction to condone the delay in excess of 120 days from the date of the order. Section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, reads thus : 35. Appeal to High Court.-Any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Appellate tribunal may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Appellate Tribunal to him on any question of law arising out of such order : provided that the High Court may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days. Explanation.-In this section 'high Court' means (a) the High Court within the jurisdiction of which the aggrieved party ordinarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain ; and (b) where the Central Government is the aggrieved party, the High Court within the jurisdiction of which the respondent, or in a case where there are more than one respondent, any of the respondents, ordinarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain. ( 2 ) IN that, the section provides for filing of appeal within 60 days and power is conferred on this court to condone delay not exceeding sixty days if sufficient cause is shown. Admittedly, the application indicating that the appeal is filed after delay of 122 days, it is not open for counsel for the appellant to contend otherwise. ( 2 ) IN that, the section provides for filing of appeal within 60 days and power is conferred on this court to condone delay not exceeding sixty days if sufficient cause is shown. Admittedly, the application indicating that the appeal is filed after delay of 122 days, it is not open for counsel for the appellant to contend otherwise. The request on behalf of counsel for the appellant that he may be permitted to amend the application as regards the facts and circumstances, is rejected and accordingly the application seeking condo nation of delay is rejected. Consequently appeal is also rejected.