S.K. Mittal vs The Union Of India And Another
2009 Latest Caselaw 3362 Del

*                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                        Writ Petition (Civil) No.6977/2008

%                          Date of Decision: 25.08.2009

S.K. MITTAL                                                .... Petitioner
                          Through Mr.Anish Dhingra, Advocate

                                    Versus

The Union of India and another                     .... Respondents
                     Through Mr.Sanjay Katyal, Advcote
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR

1.     Whether reporters of Local papers may be               YES
       allowed to see the judgment?
2.     To be referred to the reporter or not?                 NO
3.     Whether the judgment should be reported in             NO
       the Digest?



ANIL KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

*

This is a petition seeking quashing of order dated 12th August,

2008 passed by learned Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange in

Appeal No.335 to 337/2003 and directing the Tribunal to hear the

appeal on merit without insisting upon the pre-deposit of the penalty

amount of Rs.2.00 lakhs.

By order dated 12th August, 2008 in Appeal No.335 to 337/2003,

the application of the appellant, Shri S.K. Mittal, was rejected and the

petitioner was directed to deposit the penalty amount within seven days

from the date of the receipt of the order dated 12th August, 2008.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a decision dated

5th May, 2009 passed in W.P.C. No.8355 of 2008 titled S.K. Mittal v.

Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange filed by the petitioner against

the penalty amount of Rs.6,41,18,065/- imposed on him for

contravention of sections 8(1), 9(1)(a) and 9(1)(f)(i) of the Foreign

Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. By order dated 5th May, 2009, it was

noticed that the petitioner has filed 178 appeals before the Appellate

Tribunal for Foreign Exchange challenging the penalty orders.

This Court in the said writ petition considering the fact that the

orders passed directing the petitioner to deposit the penalty amount

and dismissing his appeal for dispensation, had considered the assets

of the wife of the petitioner and the lack of the assets of the petitioners

were not considered, and considering the facts that the petitioner had

already deposited Rs.5.00 lakhs with the Adjudicating Officer and on

petitioner showing his willingness to deposit a further amount of

Rs.12,50,000/- in two equal installments, first installment of Rs.2.5

lakhs payable by 30th May, 2009 and the balance amount of Rs.5.00

lakhs each payable on or before 31st July, 2009 and 30th September,

2009, granted dispensation with the deposit of the penalty amount.

While granting dispensation with the deposit of penalty amount, it was

held categorically that this order will apply equally to and shall govern

all 178 appeals which are pending before the Appellate Tribunal by the

abovenoted petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions states that the

present petition also arises out of one of the appeals bearing

No.335/2003 where the application of the petitioner for dispensation

with the pre-deposit was dismissed and the petitioner was directed to

deposit the penalty amount. Since by order dated 5th May, 2009, it has

been held that the decision to dispense with pre-deposit on petitioner

depositing Rs.12.50 lakhs shall also be applicable to the appeal from

which the present petition has arisen, the present petition can be

disposed of in terms of the said order.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that first installment of

Rs.3.5 lakhs was deposited on 28th May, 2009 and Rs.5.00 lakhs was

deposited on 30th July, 2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner states

that the balance amount of Rs.4.00 lakhs shall be deposited by the

petitioner before 30th September, 2009.

Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and all the pending

applications are disposed of. The order dated 12th August, 2008

dismissing the application of the petitioner for dispensation with the

pre-deposit and directing him to deposit the penalty amount is set

aside. The Appellate Tribunal shall decide the appeal without insisting

for pre-deposit of the entire penalty amount in terms of the order

passed in W.P(C) No.8355 of 2008 dated 5th May, 2009 and the order

passed in the present petition. Parties are left to bear their own costs.

Dasti.

August 25, 2009                                          ANIL KUMAR, J.
'Dev'