- (1.) Mr. B. Parthasarthy takes notice on behalf of the respondent.
(2.) Xx xx xx
(3.) The appeals filed by the present appellant before CEGAT were dismissed on the ground that there had been a delay of 12 days and that it had not been satisfactorily explained. We think that a delay of 12 days should not ordinarily debar a party from having his appeal heard. We find that there is some explanation for the delay of 12 days here. We are of the view that, in the circumstances, the delay of 12 days ought to have been condoned and the appeals heard on merits.;