Supreme Court of India
Digital Supreme Court Reports
The Official Law Report Fortnightly ISSN: 3048-4839 (Online)
Home
Full Text

THIRUMALAI CHEMICALS LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

SCR Citation: [2011] 4 S.C.R. 838
Year/Volume: 2011/ Volume 4
Date of Judgment: 11 April 2011
Petitioner: THIRUMALAI CHEMICALS LIMITED
Disposal Nature: Appeals Disposed Off
Neutral Citation: 2011 INSC 292
Judgment Delivered by: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.S. Panicker Radhakrishnan
Respondent: UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Case Type: CIVIL APPEAL /3191-3194/2011
Order/Judgment: Judgment
1. Headnote

Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 - ss. 19(2) and 49 - Cause of action arose when FERA was in force, but show cause notices and impugned orders issued when FEMA was in force - Appeal filed uls. 19 of FEMA - Rejection of, by Appellate Tribunal constituted under FEMA, applying the first proviso to sub section (2) of s. 52 of FERA instead of following the proviso to sub section (2) to s. 19 of FEMA -

Held: Limitation for filing appeal has to be considered u/s. 19(2) of FEMA - Provision relating to limitation is procedural- In absence of any provision to contrary, the law in force on date of initiation of appeal irrespective of the date of accrual of the cause of action for the original order, would govern the period of limitation - Section 52(2) can apply only to an appeal to the Appellate Board and not to any Appellate tribunal - Therefore, irrespective of the fact that the adjudicating officer had passed the orders with reference to the violation of the provisions of FERA, as the appeal against such order was to the appellate tribunal constituted under FEMA, necessarily s. 19(2) of FEMA alone would apply and it is not possible to import the provisions of s. 52(2) of FERA.Tribunal and High Court misdirected themselves in assuming that the period of limitation was governed by s. 52(2) of FERA - Appellate Tribunal can entertain the appeal after the prescribed period of 45 days if it is satisfied, that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the said period - Matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration - Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - ss. 52(2), 8(3) and 8(4) - General Clauses Act - s. 6.

Substantive law and procedural law - Distinction between- Held: Substantive law refers to body of rules that creates, defines and regulates rights and liabilities - Right of appeal may be a substantive right but the procedure for filing the appeal including the period of /imitation cannot be called a substantive right - Aggrieved person cannot claim any vested right claiming that he should be governed by the old provision pertaining to period of limitation - Procedural law establishes  a mechanism for determining those rights and liabilities and a machinery for enforcing them - Procedural law is retrospective meaning thereby that it would apply even to acts or transactions under the repealed Act - Right of appeal conferred u/s. 19(1) of FEMA is a substantive right - Procedure for filing an appeal under sub-section (2) of s. 19  as also the proviso to sub-section (2) of s. 19 conferring power on the Tribunal to condone delay in filing the appeal if sufficient cause is shown, are procedural rights.

2. Case referred
3. Act
  • Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (42 of 1999)
4. Keyword
  • Foreign Exchange Management Act