The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal noted that the respondent No.1 failed to appear and has not been served with summons. The Chairperson directed service of summons on Respondent No.1 via all permissible modes, including affixation, for the date 14.09.2022.
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.
DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI
Misc. Appeal No. 23/2022
Arising out of S.A. No. 306/2021 (DRT, Jaipur)
Canara Bank
Vs
M/s Jaipur Auto Mobiles & Anr.
18.08.2022 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Brijesh Sethi
Present: Mr. Hitesh Sachar, Ld. counsel for appellant bank
This matter has been taken up by me through Video Conferencing.
As per the affidavit of service filed, respondent no.2 stands served. Respondent no.1 has not been served. Let respondent no.1 be served by all permissible modes, including affixation, for 14.09.2022.
(CHAIRPERSON)
-pk
Canara Bank
M/s Jaipur Auto Mobiles
Brijesh Sethi
As recorded by the court registry
13 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
