Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Prashant Keshavrao Bansod

DRAT29 Mar 2022IA/5/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal allowed an application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal. The court accepted that a Supreme Court order excluded a specific period, reducing the condoned delay to 162 days, and directed registration of the appeal subject to payment of costs.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay allowed subject to payment of costs of Rs. 10,000 to the DRT Bar Association; appeal to be registered.

Union Bank of India versus Prashant Keshavrao Bansod — Arbitration | DRAT (2022)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT : MUMBAI

¶2

Present : Mr. Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson

¶3

I.A. No. 5/2022 in

¶4

Appeal on Diary No. 164/2020 Between

¶5

Union Bank of India & Anr. … Applicant/s V/s. Prashant Keshavrao Bansod …Respondent/s

¶6

This Applicant coming up for hearing before me in the presence of Mr. Nainesh Amin, i/b M/s. N. N. Amin & Co., Advocate for Applicants.

¶7

-: Order dated : 29/03/2022 :-

¶8

There is no representation for Respondent.

¶9

Applicants have filed application for condonation of delay of 440 days in filing present Appeal which is pointed out by the Registry.

¶10

The learned counsel appearing for Applicants submits that taking into account the order dated 10.01.2022 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M.A. No. 21/2022 in M.A. No. 665/2021 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020 which clearly states that period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Section 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribed period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings, the total delay will be reduced to 162 days.

¶11

The reasons stated for the delay are mainly that there was some default in official communication so as to file present Appeal and after decision of filing of present Appeal some documents required and

¶12

hence some more time was consumed in this process and it has been explained in the Affidavit and the Application.

¶13

The Respondent did not appear although attempts were made to serve the notice on him, by direct service as well as through Email.

¶14

Learned counsel for the Applicants states that the Applicant bank has been directed to refund Rs.85,05,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of bid till payment / realization and there is impending proceeding before the Recovery Officer, D.R.T., Aurangabad.

¶15

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and upon going the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay and the accompanying Affidavit, I find that sufficient cause has been made out by the Applicants to condone the delay and there is no prejudice caused to the Respondent as the Respondent also did not contest the application.

¶16

Hence, application for condonation of delay is allowed and the said delay is condoned subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand only) payable to DRT Bar Association at Mumbai, to be paid within two days.

¶17

The Registry may number and register the Appeal upon removal of the defects pointed out by the office.

¶18

Post on 08.04.2022 before Registrar for compliance.

¶19

Sd/Chairperson

¶20

dpj-3

Union Bank of India v. Prashant Keshavrao Bansod

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Prashant Keshavrao Bansod

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Invent Asset Securitization and Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. versus Mr Rishi Anil Aggarwal and Ors.

Sunita Ranjit Shinde versus the Karad Janata Co-Op Bank and Ors.

Union Bank of India versus Mr Naresh N Jain and Ors.

Mrs. Banoobai Mohd. Hussain Ghaswala versus Bank of Baroda

Suhas Abhimanyu Shinde and Anr. versus the Authorised Officer of Muslim Bank and Ors.

Dena Bank versus M/S Industrial Linings & Ors.