1 MSS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2767 OF 2009 AJAY C. MODY .. PETITIONER Vs. SPECIAL DIRECTOR, FERA & ORS. .. RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2768 OF 2009 JAINEX FOODS PVT. LTD. .. PETITIONER Vs. SPECIAL DIRECTOR, FERA & ORS. .. RESPONDENTS Mr. V. Jain i/b RMG Law Associates for petitioners Smt. Poornima Advani with G. Hariharan i/b H. P. Chaturvedi for respondents CORAM:SMT.RANJANA DESAI & J. P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATE: 20/3/2009 P.C. . Writ Petition No. 2768 of 2009 is not on board. By consent of the parties it is taken up on board for hearing along with Writ Petition No. 2767 of 2009 as the issues raised in both the petitions are common. 2 2. Writ Petition No. 2767 of 2009 is filed by the Director of the Company and Writ Petition No. 2768 of 2009 is filed by the Company. Hence both the petitions can be disposed by a common order. 3. In both the petitions order dated 24/11/08 passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange ("Tribunal" for short) is under challenge. The case of the respondents inter alia is that realisation of the export proceeds to the tune of US $141692.14 have remained unrealised against six G.Rs out of the total value of goods worth US $1,69,329.97 exported in the year 1986-87. Therefore, a Show Cause notice was issued to the appellants. On 30/4/97 order-in-original came to be passed. The appellants challenged the said order before the Tribunal. In that appeal they filed applications for dispensation of predeposit. 4. The impugned order disposes of the applications for dispensation of predeposit filed by the appellants. The Tribunal has held that prima facie it appears that the appellants are not able to prove reasonable efforts stated to be made by them to realise the outstanding dues. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that this observation 3 is wrong inasmuch as several documents were filed by the appellants to substantiate their contention that in fact efforts were made to realise the dues. He submitted that the appellants have written several letters to the Reserve Bank of India. They have also written letters to the Indian Embassy. Notice of the appellants’ solicitor addressed to the Foreign Customers and notice sent by the appellants’ foreign solicitors to the foreign customers were also produced. Moreover opinions of the Indian and foreign solicitors were also produced. According to learned counsel these documents have not been considered by the Tribunal. A compilation of the said documents has been submitted in this court today. 5. Prima facie it does appear that these documents have not been considered. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the impugned order should be set aside and the matter should be remanded to the Tribunal for denovo consideration in the light of documents which the appellants have produced. Hence the following order: . Impugned order dated 24/11/08 is set aside. Mater is remanded to the Tribunal for denovo 4 consideration of the application for waiver of predeposit after hearing both sides and in accordance with law. . Writ Petitions are disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE