On a motion for condonation of delayed restoration of a miscellaneous appeal dismissed by default, the tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent to condone the delay and directed payment of costs to the Bar Association.
Condonation of delay directed subject to payment of costs of Rs. 5,000 to DRT Bar Association within two weeks.
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. 87/2022 (CoD)
In
M.A. on Diary No. 142/2022 (Restoration)
In
(Misc. Appeal No. 72/2014-Disposed of)
Between
Mrs. Latha Ajitkumar Nair … Appellant/s V/s. Oriental Bank of Commerce &Ors. …Respondent/s Mr. Charles De Souza, i/b Mr. Pradeep, Advocate for Appellant.
-: Order dated : 05/05/2022 :-
Therefore, the Appellant/Applicant had to file application for condoning the delay in filing restoration application. Ld. Counsel submits that the delay be condoned and restoration application be restored to file.
Sd/Chairperson
Mks-4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 992 days in filing the restoration application should be condoned considering the migration of counsel and the pandemic.
Whether the application for condonation of delay should be allowed on payment of costs to the DRT Bar Association.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rafiq & Anr. V/s Munshilal & Anr. 1981 AIR 1400Relied on¶14
Mrs. Latha Ajitkumar Nair
Oriental Bank of Commerce & Ors.
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
