The Tribunal allowed condonation of delay of 61 days in filing an appeal before Registrar, with the Treasury to. No substantive decision on the merits was rendered in this order.
Appellate proceedings resumed; appeal filed.
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.
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson I.A. No. 65/2021 (CoD) In Appeal on Diary No. 18/2021
Between
Harish Jayantila Pandya … Appellant/s V/s. Presiding Officer-In-Charge, …Respondent/s Debts Recovery Tribunal-1, Mumbai & Ors.
Mr Pravin Deewan along with Mr Mittal Munoth i/b M/s. Kookada & Associates, Advocate for Appellant.
-: Order dated: 20/07/2022:-
Heard the learned counsel for the Appellant on the application for condonation of delay of 61 days in filing present Appeal.
On going through the averments of the application for condonation and the accompanying Affidavit, I am convinced that the delay has been properly explained.
Hence, the delay is condoned and the Appeal shall be taken on file by the Registry if there are no other defects to be cured.
Post on 23.08.2022 before Registrar for compliance.
Sd/Chairperson
dpj-13
1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal regarding an interim order can be permitted.
Harish Jayantila Pandya
Presiding Officer-In-Charge, Debts Recovery Tribunal-1, Mumbai
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
