: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. O.O.C.J. O.O.C.J. WRIT PETITION NO.552 OF 2009 WRIT PETITION NO.552 OF 2009 WRIT PETITION NO.552 OF 2009 M/s. Shrishti Impex Private Ltd. & Anr. ...Petitioners. V/s. Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr.Vikram Nankani with Mr.Sushant Murthy and Mr.Madhur Baya , advs. for the Petitioners. Mr.R.G.Bhat with Mr.Rojinder Kumar , advs. for the Respondents. CORAM: F.I.Rebello & CORAM: F.I.Rebello & CORAM: F.I.Rebello & J.H.Bhatia,JJ J.H.Bhatia,JJ J.H.Bhatia,JJ. DATE : 6th April, 2009. DATE : 6th April, 2009. DATE : 6th April, 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Rule. 2. Heard forthwith. The Tribunal had directed the petitioners herein to deposit an amount as a condition for hearing the appeal. Appeal came for hearing on 27th January, 2009 by which date the amount was not deposited. 3. Petitioners on 22nd January, 2009 moved an application for modification of the interim order dated 14.11.2008 for the reasons set out in the said application. The Tribunal without considering the said application, dismissed the appeal on 27.1.2009 on the ground that the amount ordered on 14.11.2008 had not been deposited. : 2 : 4. Petitioners have moved this Court contending that though on 22nd January, 2009, they had applied for modification of the order dated 14.11.2008, the Tribunal without considering the said application, could not have dismissed the appeal on 27.1.2009. At the hearing of this petition, the learned counsel for the Respondents submits that the Tribunal had already considered the contents of the application dated 22nd January, 2009 while passing the order of 14.11.2008. No discussion on this aspect is seen in the order dated 27.1.2009 dismissing the appeal. 5. It was open for the Tribunal to have called application for modification filed on 22nd January, 2009 and heard it alongwith the appeal and passed the order in the application before disposing off the appeal. This has not been done. This amounts to an error of law and consequently, the impugned order dated 27th January, 2009 is liable to be set aside. Hence, the following order: i. Impugned order dated 27th January, 2009 is set aside. ii. Appeal is restored to the file of the Tribunal. Tribunal to consider the application dated 22nd January, 2009 and after hearing the parties to pass orders thereon : 3 : according to law and then to proceed to dispose off the appeal. iii. Rule made absolute accordingly, No order as to costs. 6. Considering the contention on behalf of the Revenue, Tribunal to dispose off the pending application within 90 days of the copy of the order being brought to the attention of the counsel for the Revenue. (F.I.Rebello, J.) (F.I.Rebello, J.) (F.I.Rebello, J.) (J.H.Bhatia, J.) (J.H.Bhatia, J.) (J.H.Bhatia, J.)