Ankit Agarwal v. Bank of India
Case brief
What is this about?
This order records the receipt of an application under section 18 of the SARFAESI Act by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal. Noting defects in the application, the Tribunal directed the applicant to remove such defects within the permissible time.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA Diary no.378/2020; Dt.: 12/04/2022
Ankit Agarwal………...Appellant
Vs.
Bank of India……….Respondents
Received an application under section 18 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 presented by Ld. Advocate, Mr. J. Basu Roy.
Scrutiny of the application reveals the followings:
The application has been filed on behalf of Ankit Agarwal against the order dt.20.07.2020 in TSA/4/2015 passed by the Ld. Presiding Officer, DRT-3, Kolkata. Application fees of Rs.9630/- vide T.R. no.114725 dt. 21.10.2020 has been paid along with the application.
The Vakalatnama has been filed by the Ld. Advocate, Mr. J. Basu Roy.
The case is under the jurisdiction of this Appellate Tribunal.
The Application is not filed well within the period of Limitation but petition for condonation of delay is filed.
Petition for waiver of pre-deposit is filed.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the competence of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal in the present matter is established in view of the defects noted in the application.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Ankit Agarwal
- respondent
Bank of India
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · April
- CNR
- 191090003782020
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
5 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court